{"id":3723,"date":"2009-09-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009"},"modified":"2017-01-14T16:24:36","modified_gmt":"2017-01-14T10:54:36","slug":"chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009<\/div>\n
                            W.P.(S) No. 2134 of 2002\n     [ In the matter of an Application Under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India ]\n                                             ....\n            Chandra Bhushan Ravi             .....     .....     ....      ....       Petitioner\n                                         --Versus--\n            1. Food Corporation of India\n            2. The Zonal Manager (East), Food Corporation of India,\n               Calcutta -17\n            3. The District Manager, Food Corporation of India,\n               District Office, Hazaribagh   ....     ....     .....   Respondents\n                                         ....\n            For the Petitioner           :   Ms. Niki Sinha\n            For the Respondents          :   Mr. N. Bakshi\n\n\n                           PRESENT\n            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESHWAR SAHAY\n\nBy Court             The petitioner has sought to challenge the order as\n\n            contained in Annexure -4 passed by his Disciplinary Authority on\n\n            12.9.2000<\/pre>\n
 by which he has been removed from service of the Food<\/p>\n
            Corporation of India in exercise of powers conferred by Regulation<\/p>\n
            56 and Appendix-II of the Food Corporation of India (Staff)<\/p>\n
            Regulation 1971 on the basis of an Enquiry Report submitted by<\/p>\n
            the Enquiry Officer after conclusion of departmental enquiry. The<\/p>\n
            petitioner also prays for quashing of the order contained in<\/p>\n
            Annexure -6 dated 09.10.2001 i.e. the order passed by the<\/p>\n
            Appellate Authority by which the appeal filed by the petitioner<\/p>\n
            against his dismissal from service has been rejected.<\/p>\n
                            The background facts are that for recruitment of<\/p>\n
            SC\/ST candidates, for Category-III posts, an advertisement was<\/p>\n
            published in October, 1996 by the Food Corporation of India, and<\/p>\n
            accordingly, a written test was held on 19.1.1997.                   Successful<\/p>\n
            candidates were called for personal interview on different dates in<\/p>\n
            the month of March, 1997 including the petitioner and thereafter a<\/p>\n
            Merit List \/ Panel was prepared in which the name of the petitioner<\/p>\n
            also appeared. The petitioner was offered appointment by order<\/p>\n
            contained in Letter dated 17.4.1997 directing him to report at the
\n                                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
District Office, Food Corporation of India, Hazaribagh. The<\/p>\n
petitioner joined his duty on 15.5.1997 on the post of Assistant<\/p>\n
grade-III(D) in the District Office, Food Corporation of India at<\/p>\n
Hazaribagh.\n<\/p>\n
               After completion of recruitment work, a Committee<\/p>\n
was constituted by the Regional Office, Patna on 27.6.1997 to<\/p>\n
scrutinize    the   Admit   Cards,   Attestation   Forms   and   their<\/p>\n
Photographs, etc with the paper of joining report of the newly<\/p>\n
recruited employees in Food Corporation of India. The committee<\/p>\n
checked the relevant papers and detected certain objectionable<\/p>\n
matters against various candidates including the petitioner. Against<\/p>\n
the petitioner, it was found that his photograph pasted on the<\/p>\n
Admit card did not tally with the photograph furnished by him with<\/p>\n
the Attestation form at the time of his joining in Food Corporation<\/p>\n
of India on 15.5.1997. It was also detected that the signature of<\/p>\n
the petitioner available on the Attendance Sheet dated 27.3.1997<\/p>\n
prepared at the time of interview was not tallying with his signature<\/p>\n
on his joining report and Attestation form submitted by him on<\/p>\n
15.5.1997.     On detection of such forgery, the signature of the<\/p>\n
petitioner was again taken and was verified with the signature on<\/p>\n
Attendance Sheet dated 27.3.1997 as well as with the signature<\/p>\n
put by him on the joining report. The photograph of the petitioner<\/p>\n
on the Attestation form, and the photograph available on the Admit<\/p>\n
card of the petitioner were also verified.     On verification, it was<\/p>\n
found that the photograph affixed on Admit card of Roll<\/p>\n
No. 11050251 dated 19.1.1997 was not tallying with the<\/p>\n
photograph affixed on the Attestation form. Even the signature on<\/p>\n
the Admit card in the name of the petitioner did not tally with the<\/p>\n
signature available on the Attendance sheet.          Thereafter, the<\/p>\n
matter was referred to the Director, Government Examiner of
\n                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
Questioned Documents, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of<\/p>\n
India, Kolkata for verification and report. A report was submitted by<\/p>\n
the Government experts that the signature on the Attendance<\/p>\n
sheet at the time of appearing for personal interview on 27.3.1997<\/p>\n
was not tallying with the signature put by the petitioner on his<\/p>\n
joining report submitted on 15.5.1997. The photograph on the<\/p>\n
Attestation form, also did not tally with the photograph on the<\/p>\n
Admit Card. Thereafter, a departmental proceeding was initiated<\/p>\n
against the petitioner for the charges that he after conspiracy acted<\/p>\n
as an impostor and managed to secure service on the post of<\/p>\n
Assistant grade-III(D) in the Food Corporation of India by adopting<\/p>\n
corrupt practice\/ unfair means at the time of personal interview on<\/p>\n
27.3.1997.\n<\/p>\n
              The petitioner after notice submitted his written<\/p>\n
statement and contested the charge in the Departmental Enquiry.<\/p>\n
             As it appears, on behalf of the Department, six<\/p>\n
witnesses were examined and several documents were adduced in<\/p>\n
evidence including the report of the Handwriting Expert as well as<\/p>\n
on the Attendance sheet, Attestation Form, Joining Report, etc.<\/p>\n
After conclusion of the Departmental Enquiry, a report was<\/p>\n
submitted by the Enquiry Officer to the Disciplinary authority<\/p>\n
holding that the charges against the petitioner was found to be<\/p>\n
proved. After perusing the relevant papers and the Enquiry report,<\/p>\n
the Disciplinary authority by order as contained in Annexure -4<\/p>\n
dated 12.9.2000 passed an order for removal of the petitioner from<\/p>\n
service.\n<\/p>\n
             Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a departmental<\/p>\n
appeal, which was disposed of by order dated 9.10.2001 as<\/p>\n
contained in Annexure-6 by the Zonal Manager (East), who by a<\/p>\n
reasoned order, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner. It is,
\n                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
these two orders, contained in Annexure-4 and Annexure-6, which<\/p>\n
are being challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition. Ms. Niki<\/p>\n
Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that<\/p>\n
the charge against the petitioner was that he arranged another<\/p>\n
person to appear in the interview on 27.3.1997 in his place and he<\/p>\n
signed on the Attendance sheet at the time of Oral interview, but<\/p>\n
this fact was not established by providing any evidence in the<\/p>\n
departmental proceeding. She further submitted that the person<\/p>\n
who prepared the Attendance sheet, and the person who obtained<\/p>\n
the signature of the petitioner were not examined by the<\/p>\n
Department, and therefore, it cannot be said that the charges were<\/p>\n
established against the petitioner. Lastly, it is submitted that the<\/p>\n
punishment of removal from service is disproportionate to the<\/p>\n
charges against the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
               On the other hand, Mr. N. Bakshi, learned counsel<\/p>\n
appearing for the respondent-Corporation, submitted that the<\/p>\n
standard of proof in a Domestic or Departmental Enquiry is quite<\/p>\n
different from the standards of proof in any criminal trial. The<\/p>\n
Domestic   \/    Departmental      enquiry,   held   on   the   basis   of<\/p>\n
preponderance of probability, whereas in the criminal trial, the<\/p>\n
charge is to be established beyond all reasonable doubt. He also<\/p>\n
submitted that the provision of Evidence Act is not applicable so far<\/p>\n
as the Departmental proceeding is concerned, and therefore, the<\/p>\n
strict proof of the charge as required in a criminal trial is not<\/p>\n
required in a Departmental proceeding. He further submitted that<\/p>\n
by sufficient oral and documentary evidence, the charge against<\/p>\n
the petitioner was found to be established, and therefore, after<\/p>\n
considering the gravity of the misconduct committed by the<\/p>\n
petitioner, he was removed from the service.             For such grave
\n                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
misconduct, the appropriate punishment is removal from service,<\/p>\n
therefore it cannot be said to be excessive.\n<\/p>\n
             From perusal of the Enquiry Report which has been<\/p>\n
annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, it appears that the Oral<\/p>\n
as well as Documentary evidence have been discussed therein in<\/p>\n
detail. It further appears from the said report that the Deputy<\/p>\n
Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Central Forensic<\/p>\n
Institute, Government of India, Kolkata, submitted his report, which<\/p>\n
was exhibited during the enquiry, whereas he reported that the<\/p>\n
signature put on the Attestation Sheet prepared at the time of<\/p>\n
interview was not tallying with the signature put on the papers<\/p>\n
submitted at the time of joining of the service by the petitioner.<\/p>\n
On consideration of the evidence, it was found by the Enquiry<\/p>\n
Officer, that the petitioner arranged another person to appear in<\/p>\n
the interview on 27.3.1997 in place of himself who had signed in<\/p>\n
the Attendance sheet at the time of Oral interview. Government<\/p>\n
Examiner also deposed during the enquiry.\n<\/p>\n
             It is on the basis of overwhelming evidence on the<\/p>\n
record the enquiry officer held that the charges stood established.<\/p>\n
             I find from the impugned order of the Appellate court<\/p>\n
that after application of mind, and on consideration of the relevant<\/p>\n
materials on record, he has concurred that the findings arrieved at<\/p>\n
by the Disciplinary Authority relying on the Enquiry report. It is<\/p>\n
settled law that if in any departmental proceeding \/ domestic<\/p>\n
enquiry, on the basis of the evidence on record, findings on fact is<\/p>\n
arrieved at, then this Court should not substitute its own findings,<\/p>\n
in exercise of Supervisory Jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of<\/p>\n
the Constitution of India, and the findings on facts cannot be<\/p>\n
disturbed by reappraisal of the entire evidence afresh, unless it is<\/p>\n
shown that the findings on facts arrieved at are perverse in nature
\n                                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
               or are against the materials on record. Reference in this regard is<\/p>\n
               made in the case of Syed Yakoob Versus K. S. Radhakrishnan<\/p>\n
               & Others, reported in (A.I.R. 1964 SC 477) and which has been<\/p>\n
               relied and reiterated in a subsequent recent decision of the Hon’ble<\/p>\n
               Supreme Court in the case of Cholan Roadways Ltd. Versus<\/p>\n
               G. Thirugnanasambandam, reported in [(2005) 3 SCC 241].<\/p>\n
                               In view of the discussions and findings as above, I do<\/p>\n
               not find force in the submission advanced by the petitioner. I do<\/p>\n
               not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders. The<\/p>\n
               punishment of removal from service also cannot be said to be<\/p>\n
               disproportionate to the charge in view of its gravity. Such employee<\/p>\n
               who indulges in such an activity as has been found to be done in<\/p>\n
               the present case, does not require sympathetic consideration.<\/p>\n
               Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, and the<\/p>\n
               same is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.<\/p>\n
                                                (AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J.)<\/p>\n
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
\nThe 03rd of September, 2009
\nN.A.F.R.\/S.I.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 W.P.(S) No. 2134 of 2002 [ In the matter of an Application Under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India ] …. Chandra Bhushan Ravi ….. ….. …. …. Petitioner –Versus– 1. Food Corporation of India 2. […]<\/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-3723","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nChandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-14T10:54:36+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-14T10:54:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1530,\"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\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-14T10:54:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 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":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-14T10:54:36+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-14T10:54:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009"},"wordCount":1530,"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\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009","name":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-14T10:54:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-bhushan-ravi-vs-the-food-corporation-of-india-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chandra Bhushan Ravi vs The Food Corporation Of India on 3 September, 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\/3723","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=3723"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3723\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3723"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3723"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3723"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}