{"id":234897,"date":"2005-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005"},"modified":"2015-09-22T23:53:27","modified_gmt":"2015-09-22T18:23:27","slug":"a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","title":{"rendered":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED:19\/10\/2005   \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HONOUABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SATHASIVAM           \nAND  \nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KRISHNAN           \n\nW.P.No.33090 OF 2005   \n\n\nA.M.Christy                             ...Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1.Union of India\n  Rep. by Lt. General,\n  Directorate General Military\n     Training General Staff Branch,\n  Army Headquarters, \n  New Delhi - 110 011.\n\n2.Union of India,\n  Rep. by The Lt. General,\n  Commandant,  \n  DSSC\/Est\/1566\/CMD\/AMC,    \n  Raksha Seva Staff College\n  Defence Services Staff College,\n  Wellington (Nilgiris) - 643 231.\n\n3.Union of India,\n  Rep. by Lt. Col. Thiru.T.Nandakumar,\n  Inquiry Officer,\n  Defence Services Staff College,\n  Wellington - 643 231.                                 ...Respondents\n\n\n\n        Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of  India  praying  for\nthe issuance of a Writ of Certiorari as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioner :  Mr.S.Periyaswamy\n\nFor Respondent :  NIL\n\n:O R D E R \n<\/pre>\n<p>(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY P.SATHASIVAM,J.)             <\/p>\n<p>        Aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai<br \/>\nBench,  dated  18.08.2005 made in O.A.No.1157 of 2004, confirming the order of<br \/>\nthe  1st  respondent  dated  27.10.2004  as  well  as  2nd  respondent   dated<br \/>\n04.09.2002,  the  petitioner  has filed the above writ petition to quash those<br \/>\norders.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder:-\n<\/p>\n<p>        (a) According to him, he was serving in the  Army  and  discharged  on<br \/>\n31.03.1994 from  military  service.    After retirement as an Exservicemen, he<br \/>\njoined the Civil Employment as Driver under the 2nd  respondent,  namely,  the<br \/>\nRaksha  Seva  Staff  College, Wellington (Nilgiris), as Driver during February<br \/>\n1997.  The 2nd respondent issued a charge memo dated 04.01.2002  stating  that<br \/>\non  03.01.2002  at 17.45 hours, he was found intoxicated and so certified by a<br \/>\nqualified Medical Officer.  The petitioner submitted  his  explanation.    Not<br \/>\nsatisfied with  the  said  explanation, the 2nd respondent appointed Lt.  Col.<br \/>\nT.  Nandakumar as Enquiry Officer, 3rd respondent herein.  The petitioner  was<br \/>\npermitted to  engage one R.P.K.Venkata Raman as defence Assistant.  During the<br \/>\ncourse of enquiry, after a particular  stage,  the  petitioner  boycotted  the<br \/>\nenquiry.   The  Enquiry  Officer  submitted  a  report  to the 2 nd respondent<br \/>\nholding that the charge leveled against the petitioner is  proved.    The  2nd<br \/>\nrespondent  by  his proceedings dated 04.09.2002, passed an order imposing the<br \/>\npenalty of compulsory retirement from service under Rule 11 (vii)  of  Central<br \/>\nCivil  Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (in short CCS<br \/>\n(CCA) Rules).\n<\/p>\n<p>                (b) Against the said order, he preferred an appeal before  the<br \/>\nAppellate Authority.      The   Appellate   Authority,  without  affording  an<br \/>\nopportunity to the petitioner, modified the punishment as one of removal  from<br \/>\nservice, instead  of  compulsory retirement passed by the 2nd respondent.  The<br \/>\nsaid order was  challenged  before  the  Central  Administrative  Tribunal  in<br \/>\nO.A.No.523  of 2003 and by order dated 30.10.2003, the Tribunal, set aside the<br \/>\nsaid order and directed the 1st respondent to issue notice to  the  petitioner<br \/>\nbefore modifying  the  punishment as one of removal from service.  Thereafter,<br \/>\nthe 1st  respondent  issued  a  notice  calling  for  an  explanation  to  the<br \/>\npetitioner, as  to  why the punishment should not be enhanced.  The petitioner<br \/>\nsubmitted a  detailed  representation.    But  the  1st  respondent,   without<br \/>\nappreciation  of  the fact, passed an order dismissing the appeal and modified<br \/>\nthe punishment by removing the petitioner from  service.    Aggrieved  by  the<br \/>\nsame,  the  petitioner  preferred  O.A.No.1157  of  2004  before  the  Central<br \/>\nAdministrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench and ultimately the said appeal was also<br \/>\ndismissed by order dated 18.08.2005.  Questioning the same, the petitioner has<br \/>\nfiled the present writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  After taking us through the impugned order of the Tribunal and the<br \/>\nother proceedings, the learned counsel  appearing  for  the  petitioner  would<br \/>\nsubmit  that  the  petitioner  was  not  afforded  adequate opportunity in the<br \/>\nenquiry and in any event the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities failed  to<br \/>\nnote that the punishments imposed on earlier occasions are minor.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   On  going  through the relevant materials, orders of Original and<br \/>\nAppellate Authorities as well as the impugned order of the  Tribunal,  we  are<br \/>\nunable to  accept the said contention for the following reasons.  It is not in<br \/>\ndispute that the petitioner\/applicant is an Exserviceman and he was discharged<br \/>\non 31.03.1994 and thereafter, he was  reemployed  as  Civilian  MT  Driver  at<br \/>\nDefence Services College, Wellington ( Nilgiris) on 11.02.1997.  The said post<br \/>\nwas later re-designated as Civilian Motor Driver (Ordinary Grade) during 1999.<br \/>\nThe charge against the applicant\/petitioner was that, he was found intoxicated<br \/>\nat 17.45  hours  on  03.01.2002.    The  fact  that  he  was  in a position of<br \/>\nintoxication which was also certified by a qualified Medical Officer.   Though<br \/>\nthe  petitioner  has  submitted  his  explanation,  since  the  same  was  not<br \/>\nacceptable, an enquiry was conducted by appointing Lt.  Col.  T.    Nandakumar<br \/>\nas Enquiry Officer.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.   It is further seen that though the petitioner participated in the<br \/>\nenquiry, the materials placed show that he stopped attending  enquiry  in  the<br \/>\nmid-way.   The  Enquiry  Officer,  based  on the materials, submitted a report<br \/>\nholding that the charges leveled against the applicant are proved.  It is also<br \/>\nseen that copy of the report was furnished to the applicant.  The Disciplinary<br \/>\nAuthority, after taking note  of  the  Enquiry  Proceedings,  report  and  the<br \/>\nearlier  antecedents of the applicant, concluded that the applicant should not<br \/>\nbe retained in service  in  public  interest,  passed  an  order  compulsorily<br \/>\nretiring him  from  service.  Though, initially the said order was modified by<br \/>\nthe Appellate Authority as one of the removal from service,  subsequently,  on<br \/>\ndirection by the Tribunal, fresh notice was issued to the petitioner and after<br \/>\nconsidering  his  further  explanation, the Appellate Authority, confirmed his<br \/>\nearlier decision and modified the punishment  from  compulsory  retirement  to<br \/>\nremoval from service.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   It  is  clear  that after finding that the applicant had consumed<br \/>\nalcohol while he was on duty, after framing proper charges, conducting enquiry<br \/>\nand based on the report, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order, which was<br \/>\nmodified by the  Appellate  Authority,  after  affording  opportunity  to  the<br \/>\npetitioner.   Though,  it  was  argued  that  the  earlier punishments are not<br \/>\nserious one, the particulars furnished show that the applicant is  a  habitual<br \/>\ndrunkard  and  in  his  short  tenure of six years of service with effect from<br \/>\nFebruary 1997 to September 2002, he was awarded the following punishments  for<br \/>\nhaving been found in the influence of alcohol while on duty:-\n<\/p>\n<pre>a)      Warned in writing on 10.07.1997.\nb)      Minor penalty of censure during December 1999, under Rule 11(i) of CCS\n(CC&amp;A) Rules, 1965. \nc) Minor penalty of with holding of one increment of pay        for  a  period\n<\/pre>\n<p>of one year with effect from February   2002, under Rule 11 (iv) of CCS (CC&amp;A)<br \/>\nRules, 1965.\n<\/p>\n<p>In such circumstances, it cannot be claimed that earlier punishments  are  not<br \/>\nrelevant for  consideration.   It is not the case of the applicant that he had<br \/>\nunblemished service.  It is also not in dispute  that  his  job  is  to  drive<br \/>\nvehicle.   Though an argument was advanced that he consumed liquor late in the<br \/>\nevening that is at 17.45 hours, the fact remains that he was on duty  even  at<br \/>\nthe relevant  time.  All these aspects have been considered by the Authorities<br \/>\nas well as the Tribunal.  In the absence of any  other  material,  we  are  in<br \/>\nagreement that  the  conclusion  arrived at by the Tribunal.  Accordingly, the<br \/>\nwrit petition fails and the same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.Lt.  General,<br \/>\nUnion of India<br \/>\nDirectorate General Military<br \/>\nTraining General Staff Branch,<br \/>\nArmy Headquarters, New Delhi &#8211; 110 011.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Lt.  General<br \/>\nUnion of India,<br \/>\nCommandant,<br \/>\nDSSC\/Est\/1566\/CMD\/AMC,<br \/>\nRaksha Seva Staff College,<br \/>\nWellington (Nilgiris) &#8211; 643 231.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.Lt.  Col.  Thiru.  T.Nandakumar<br \/>\nInquiry Officer,<br \/>\nUnion of India, Defence Services Staff College,<br \/>\nWellington &#8211; 643 231.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:19\/10\/2005 CORAM THE HONOUABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SATHASIVAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KRISHNAN W.P.No.33090 OF 2005 A.M.Christy &#8230;Petitioner -Vs- 1.Union of India Rep. by Lt. General, Directorate General Military Training General Staff Branch, Army Headquarters, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-234897","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1089,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\",\"name\":\"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005","datePublished":"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005"},"wordCount":1089,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005","name":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-22T18:23:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-christy-vs-union-of-india-on-19-october-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.M.Christy vs Union Of India on 19 October, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234897","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=234897"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234897\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=234897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=234897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=234897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}