{"id":34773,"date":"2009-06-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009"},"modified":"2015-10-20T15:54:23","modified_gmt":"2015-10-20T10:24:23","slug":"nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                W.P.(S) No. 2451 of 2003\nNandlal Pandit                 ... ...       Petitioner.\n                        Versus\nThe State of Jharkhand &amp; others ... ...      Respondents\nCORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL\n                       ......\nFor the Petitioner    : M\/s Ritu Kumar, Ravi Kr. Singh\nFor the State         : Mr. Arvind Kr. Mehta, J.C. to G.P.-I\nFor the A.G.          : Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava\n                   ......\n03\/ Dated 25th June, 2009\n1.          The present petition has been preferred against an order\npassed by respondent no. 4 dated 28th of March, 2003 (Annexure-9 to\nthe memo of the present petition) whereby the benefit of salary has\nbeen withdrawn which was given to the petitioner due to his\npromotion as a Headmaster. It is alleged by respondents that\npromotion was wrongly given to the petitioner. This conclusion was\narrived at by respondent no. 4 on the basis of a report given by\nAccountant General Office, but, without giving any opportunity of\nbeing heard to the petitioner. Therefore, it has been challenged by way\nof writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.\n2.          It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the\nimpugned order at Annexure-9 passed by respondent no. 4 dated 28th\nMarch, 2003 is without any application of mind. In fact, report given\nby the Accountant General, which is at Annexure-7 to the memo of\nthe present petition reveals the fact that because of want of\ndocuments it is not clear about the present petitioner's qualification\netc. and therefore, promotion given to the present petitioner was\nillegal. It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that\nlooking to the affidavit in reply filed by the respondents also it has\nbeen admitted fact that no documents were supplied by the concerned\nrespondent authorities to the audit party of the respondents and\ntherefore, if an opportunity of being heard would have been given to\nthe present petitioner by the concerned respondent authorities, it\ncould have been pointed out by petitioner that the present petitioner\nwas correctly promoted by order dated 15th May, 1989 on the post of\nHeadmaster w.e.f. 1st January, 1988. It has submitted by the counsel\nfor the petitioner that neither the office of the Accountant General has\ngiven any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner nor the other\nrespondents have given any opportunity of being heard to the\npetitioner and an ex-parte conclusion has been arrived at by the\nrespondents about the promotion of the present petitioner. Thus,\nthere is a gross violation of the principles of natural justice before\npassing the impugned order at Annexure-9 to the memo of the\n                               -2-\n\n\npresent petition by respondent no. 4 dated 28th of March, 2003 and\nthe same deserves to be quashed and set aside.\n3.          I have heard counsel for the respondents-State, who has\nsubmitted that the order is passed by respondent no. 4 at Annexure-9\nwas on the basis of report given by the Accountant General Office and\nas per the report of the Accountant General Office, promotion given to\nthe present petitioner on the post of Headmaster was wrong and\nillegal and therefore, the order of recovery was passed at Annexure-9\nto the memo of the present petition. It is also submitted by the\ncounsel for the respondents-State that once the report of the\nAccountant General was given, it has to be implemented by the State\nand therefore, order at Annexure-9 has been passed by the\nrespondent no. 4 and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.\n4.          I have heard counsel for the respondent no. 5, who has\ndrawn the attention of this Court to paragraph nos. 6, 7, 10 &amp; 11 of\nhis counter affidavit, which read as under:-\n            \"6.     That at the outset it is stated and submitted that the\n            inspection report contains initial audit findings which are\n            taken up with the appropriate authorities in the concerned\n            department\/organization           for     their     comments\/\n            clarifications\/ remedial actions and thereafter the final\n            finding of the audit will be incorporated in the Audit Report.\n            The observations mentioned in Audit memos\/statement of\n            fact, Inspection Report etc. are unpublished official records\n            and are not final findings of the audit as such no testimony\n            can be given on them. The office of the answering\n            respondent, thus, is not a proper and necessary party at\n            this stage and hence prays for deletion.\n            7.      That so far merit of case is concerned it is stated and\n            submitted that the Audit suggested that the higher\n            authorities may investigate the matter and thereafter\n            recoveries, if any, may be made from the concerned\n            officials.\n            10. That it is also pertinent to state and submit, besides\n            the promotion from retrospective effect, the promotion of the\n            petitioner to the post of Headmaster with effect from\n            1.1.1988<\/pre>\n<p> by District Superintendent of Education,<br \/>\n            Sahebganj by his letter no. 4554-56 dated 15.5.1989, is<br \/>\n            also illegal on the ground that as per report dated<br \/>\n            25.6.1996 of the District Estt. Committee, which was<br \/>\n            authorised to grant promotion, the petitioner was junior in<br \/>\n            the seniority list. Inspite of repeated reminders for<br \/>\n            submission of seniority list and concerned file of approval<br \/>\n            of District Establishment Committee by which the petitioner<br \/>\n            was recommended for promotion and other related<br \/>\n            documents were not made available to the audit by the<br \/>\n            District Superintendent of Education, Pakur. The Deputy<br \/>\n            Commissioner, Pakur was also informed for the same even<br \/>\n            then the documents were not produced before the Audit<br \/>\n            party.\n<\/p>\n<p>            11. That it is stated that the office of the answering<br \/>\n            respondent, on the basis of the documents produced by the<br \/>\n            auditee has merely pointed out the illegality and<br \/>\n            irregularity in the Inspection Report and suggested that<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                              -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>            matter may be investigated by the higher authorities,<br \/>\n            responsibilities may be fixed and recoverable amount may<br \/>\n            be recovered under intimation from the concerned officials.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>                                              (Emphasis Supplied)<br \/>\n            In view of the aforesaid submission, it appears that never<br \/>\na final report was given by the Accountant General Office. It is also<br \/>\nclearer from the submission of the counsel for the respondent no. 5 as<br \/>\nwell as from the counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 5 that a<br \/>\ndirection was never given to the State to straightway deduct the<br \/>\namount. Looking to the aforesaid paragraphs of the counter affidavit,<br \/>\nespecially looking to the paragraph nos. 7 and 11, it was suggested by<br \/>\nthe Accountant General Office that matter may be investigated,<br \/>\nenquiry may be conducted and therefore, action may be initiated, but<br \/>\nit appears that respondent nos. 1 to 4 has never applied their mind at<br \/>\nall upon the report of respondent no. 5-Accountant General Office. It<br \/>\nwas never insisted by the Accountant General Office that the report is<br \/>\nconclusive piece of evidence. On the contrary, very cautiously,<br \/>\nguardedly and legally it has been suggested by the report of the<br \/>\nAccountant General Office that in absence of documents from District<br \/>\nSuperintendent of Education, Pakur, enquiry should be made and<br \/>\nthereafter, amount can be deducted. Report of the Accountant<br \/>\nGeneral office is a mere suggestion. It is meant for awakening the<br \/>\nsenses of the respondent authorities so that upon holding proper<br \/>\nenquiry, necessary action may be initiated against the present<br \/>\npetitioner. This aspect of the matter has not been properly<br \/>\nappreciated by the respondent nos. 1 to 4 and straightway, ex-parte<br \/>\nan order at Annexure-9 has been passed by respondent no. 4. Even<br \/>\npreviously also orders have been passed in Writ Petitions that<br \/>\nwhenever report of the Accountant General Office is given for<br \/>\ndeduction of any benefit, the principles of natural justice ought to<br \/>\nhave been followed by the State authorities. Straightway, there cannot<br \/>\nbe a recovery on the basis of Accountant General&#8217;s Office report.<br \/>\nProcedure established by law ought to be followed before taking away<br \/>\nany benefit and at least principles of natural justice must be followed<br \/>\nand observed despite there being a report given by the Accountant<br \/>\nGeneral Office. It appears that State authority is always straightway<br \/>\nimplementing the report given by the Accountant General office,<br \/>\nwithout giving any opportunity of being heard to the concerned<br \/>\npersons. In fact, in the present case also, no show cause notice, no<br \/>\nhearing, much less an opportunity of being heard was given to the<br \/>\npetitioner and as stated hereinabove even affidavit filed by the<br \/>\nAccountant General Office reveals the fact that the report given by the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     Accountant General is mere suggestion and matter must be enquired<br \/>\n     into by the concerned respondent department and thereafter only the<br \/>\n     action must be initiated.\n<\/p>\n<p>     5.          As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and reasons<br \/>\n     and counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 5, I hereby quash<br \/>\n     and set aside the order passed by respondent no. 4 dated 28th of<br \/>\n     March, 2003 at Annexure-9 to the memo of the present petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>     6.          I also direct the Registry of this Court to send a copy of<br \/>\n     this order to the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand so that he<br \/>\n     shall issue a Circular to all the concerned subordinate officers that<br \/>\n     whenever there is a report of the office of the Accountant General for<br \/>\n     deduction, withdrawal or taking away any benefit given to the<br \/>\n     employee of the respondent-State, then the same may not be<br \/>\n     implemented straightway like a decree of a court, but, it should be<br \/>\n     implemented at least after following principles of natural justice.<br \/>\n     Report given by Accountant General Office can never be executed like<br \/>\n     a decree of competent court. It is never a conclusive piece of evidence<br \/>\n     and an opportunity of being heard ought to have been given to the<br \/>\n     person concern. Even counsel who is appearing on behalf of the<br \/>\n     Accountant General Office has also submitted that they are never<br \/>\n     insisting that the procedure, establishment by law or principles of<br \/>\n     natural justice should never be followed. In view of this repeated<br \/>\n     errors on behalf of the State of Jharkhand, the aforesaid directions is<br \/>\n     given to the Chief Secretary so that he shall issue a necessary<br \/>\n     Circulars\/Orders so as to avoid multifariousness of the petitions. I<br \/>\n     also direct the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand that the<br \/>\n     aforesaid Circulars\/Orders shall be issued within a period of twelve<br \/>\n     weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the same<br \/>\n     shall be supplied to this Court also.\n<\/p>\n<p>     7.          I hereby also direct the Registry to enlist this matter, even<br \/>\n     though it is disposed of, on 1st December, 2009 under the heading<br \/>\n     &#8220;For Compliance of the Order&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>     8.          In view of the aforesaid directions, this writ petition<br \/>\n     stands disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                 (D. N. Patel. J)<br \/>\nVK\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2451 of 2003 Nandlal Pandit &#8230; &#8230; Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand &amp; others &#8230; &#8230; Respondents CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL &#8230;&#8230; For the Petitioner [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34773","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - 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\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-20T10:24:23+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-20T10:24:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":967,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-20T10:24:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"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":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - 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\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-20T10:24:23+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-20T10:24:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009"},"wordCount":967,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009","name":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-20T10:24:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-lal-pandit-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-25-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nand Lal Pandit vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 25 June, 2009"}]},{"@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:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","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\/34773","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=34773"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34773\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34773"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34773"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34773"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}