{"id":50033,"date":"2008-10-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-01-29T21:53:01","modified_gmt":"2017-01-29T16:23:01","slug":"nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008<\/div>\n
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                       CHANDIGARH\n\n\n\n\n                                         CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)\n                                        Date of decision: October 3, 2008.\n\n\n\nNirbair Singh                                            ..... Petitioner\n\n\n                  Versus\n\n\nState of Punjab & Ors.                                   .... Respondents\n\n\n\nCORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON.\n            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA.\n\n\n\nPresent:    Mr. Arun Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.\n            Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for\n            respondents No.1 to 4.\n\n                                     ***\n\nS.S. SARON, J.\n<\/pre>\n
            This writ petition under Articles 226\/227 of the Constitution of<\/p>\n
India has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated<\/p>\n
15.05.2007 (Annexure P-2) whereby the petitioner who is working as a<\/p>\n
revenue patwari has been transferred from the Revenue Circle Dial Bhatti to<\/p>\n
Ranike as also the order dated 31.05.2007 (Annexure P-3) whereby he has<\/p>\n
been further transferred from Ranike to Devidass Pura.<\/p>\n
            The petitioner was appointed as Patwari in the revenue<\/p>\n
department on 31.12.1996 and has been working continuously as such till
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                    -2-\n<\/p>\n
date without any break. He was transferred from Patwar Circle Razia to<\/p>\n
Dial Bhatti, Tehsil Ajnala vide order dated 30.11.2004 (Annexure P-1).<\/p>\n
Thereafter, in terms of the impugned order dated 15.05.2007 (Annexure<\/p>\n
P-2) he was transferred from Dial Bhatti to Ranike, Tehsil Ajnala within<\/p>\n
two and a half years of the earlier transfer . Within about fifteen days,<\/p>\n
thereafter, he has been transferred vide order dated 31.05.2007 (Annexure<\/p>\n
P-3) from Ranike to Devidasspura, Tehsil Amritsar. It is submitted that the<\/p>\n
petitioner was serving at Dial Bhatti, which is very near to his place of<\/p>\n
residence and now in pursuance of the impugned order, he has been<\/p>\n
transferred to Devidaspura which is 40 kms from his residence. He had in<\/p>\n
fact been posted at Ranike only in end of November 2004 i.e. only two and<\/p>\n
a half years earlier to his transfer. Besides, the wife of the petitioner<\/p>\n
namely Smt. Harjinder Kaur is serving as a Teacher at Government High<\/p>\n
School, Jagdev Khurd, District Amritsar.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage has prayed that<\/p>\n
he may be granted one day’s time to argue the matter. In view of the stay<\/p>\n
that has been granted, learned Counsel for the respondent opposes the<\/p>\n
adjournment. We are of the view that this matter does not warrant any<\/p>\n
further delay. The stay was granted by this Court on 07.02.2008 and grant<\/p>\n
of any further time in the facts and circumstances is unwarranted and is,<\/p>\n
therefore, declined.\n<\/p>\n
            It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that<\/p>\n
being a couple case, the petitioner is liable to be posted at a place near the<\/p>\n
place where both the husband and the wife can live together. A reference<\/p>\n
has been made to the instructions dated 13.04.2007 (Annexure P5) in this<\/p>\n
regard. In view of the transfer order dated 31.05.2007 (Annexure P-3), the
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                    -3-\n<\/p>\n
said instructions, it is alleged, have been infringed. It is submitted that the<\/p>\n
respondents failed to call for option from the petitioner as regards his<\/p>\n
preferential place of posting nor the fact that his wife is serving as a<\/p>\n
Teacher in a school at Jagdev Khurd been taken into consideration. The<\/p>\n
petitioner is serving at a distance of 35-40 kms from his residence whereas,<\/p>\n
his wife is serving at another place. Therefore, he is required to travel<\/p>\n
approximately 80 kms daily to serve at the present place of his posting. It is<\/p>\n
also alleged that the transfer of the petitioner is politically motivated and a<\/p>\n
pre-planned transfer. The respondents had transferred the petitioner thrice<\/p>\n
in three years and that too to at a far off place without even considering the<\/p>\n
guidelines, issued by the respondents themselves for the postings and<\/p>\n
transfers of its employees.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed strong reliance<\/p>\n
on the instructions dated 13.04.2007 (Annexure P-5) relating to policy of<\/p>\n
transfer. A particular reference has been made in respect to para 2 ( c ) of<\/p>\n
the instructions relating to the postings of husband and wife at a convenient<\/p>\n
and preferential station.     It is submitted that the instructions inter alia<\/p>\n
enjoins that in case where both husband and wife are in Government<\/p>\n
service, it is desirable to keep the couple at one station for a period of not<\/p>\n
more than five years and thereafter, he\/she should be transferred as per<\/p>\n
policy. Even, in case, where the wife is in Government service and husband<\/p>\n
is under a private employment, the same attitude may be adopted. Para 3<\/p>\n
(d) of the said instructions, it is submitted, provides that before considering<\/p>\n
terms for proposals, every transferring authority must ensure that record of<\/p>\n
list of couple cases, unmarried girls, widows, handicapped persons and<\/p>\n
employees having mentally retarded children along with their present
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                     -4-\n<\/p>\n
postings and also requests for preferential places are available in the office.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also emphasized that the transfer of<\/p>\n
the petitioner is mala fide and is not for any professed purpose.<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted<\/p>\n
that the State does not want to file any reply and in any case there is no<\/p>\n
element of disrupting the petitioner from service inasmuch as the petitioner<\/p>\n
is being transferred within same district. Besides, the transfer order was<\/p>\n
passed on 31.05.2007 and the petitioner has approached this Court in<\/p>\n
January, 2008 i.e. after about seven months of the order of transfer. It is<\/p>\n
also submitted that the petitioner does not have any vested right to seek<\/p>\n
transfer at a particular station.\n<\/p>\n
             We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contentions<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and with their assistance,<\/p>\n
perused the record. The guidelines laid down by the State for the transfer<\/p>\n
of its employees from one place to another are for the guidance of officers<\/p>\n
and are not enforceable for the purposes of assailing their transfer. These<\/p>\n
do not vest any immunity in an employee from transfer in Government<\/p>\n
service. Besides, transfer of an employee from one station to another is a<\/p>\n
normal feature and incidence of service which does not, in any manner,<\/p>\n
alter the conditions of his service. No Government servant can claim to<\/p>\n
remain at a particular post or a station of his choice.<\/p>\n
                           The Supreme Court in B. Varadha Rao v. State of<\/p>\n
                           Karnataka and Ors., AIR<\/a> 1986 SC 1955 has inter<\/p>\n
                           alia held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                                    “It is well understood that transfer of a<\/p>\n
                                    government servant who is appointed to a
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                -5-\n<\/p>\n
                          particular cadre of transferable posts from<\/p>\n
                          one place to another is an ordinary incident<\/p>\n
                          of service and therefore does not result in<\/p>\n
                          any alteration of any of the conditions of<\/p>\n
                          service   to   his    disadvantage.      That     a<\/p>\n
                          government     servant     is   liable     to    be<\/p>\n
                          transferred to a similar post in the same<\/p>\n
                          cadre is a normal feature and incident of<\/p>\n
                          government service and no government<\/p>\n
                          servant can claim to remain in a particular<\/p>\n
                          place or in a particular post unless, of<\/p>\n
                          course, his appointment itself is to a<\/p>\n
                          specified, non-transferable post. As the<\/p>\n
                          learned Judges rightly observe:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                               The norms enunciated by government<\/p>\n
                               for the guidance of its officers in the<\/p>\n
                               matter of regulating transfers are more<\/p>\n
                               in the nature of guidelines to the<\/p>\n
                               officers who order transfers in the<\/p>\n
                               exigencies      of   administration        than<\/p>\n
                               vesting of any immunity from transfer<\/p>\n
                               in the government servants.”It is no<\/p>\n
                               doubt true that if the power of transfer<\/p>\n
                               is abused, the exercise of the power is<\/p>\n
                               vitiated. But it is one thing to say that<\/p>\n
                               an order of transfer which is not made
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                     -6-<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                                    in public interest but for collateral<\/p>\n
                                    purposes and with oblique motives is<\/p>\n
                                    vitiated by abuse of powers, and an<\/p>\n
                                    altogether different thing to say that<\/p>\n
                                    such an order per se made in the<\/p>\n
                                    exigencies   of   service     varies    any<\/p>\n
                                    condition    of   service,    express    or<\/p>\n
                                    implied, to the disadvantage of the<\/p>\n
                                    concerned government servant.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
            The claim of the petitioner on the ground that it is a couple<\/p>\n
case is also without merit. In Bank of India v. Jagjit Singh Mehta, AIR<\/a><\/p>\n
1992 SC 519 it was observed by the Supreme Court that there can be no<\/p>\n
doubt that ordinarily and as far as practicable the husband and wife who are<\/p>\n
both employed should be posted at the same station even if their employers<\/p>\n
be different. The desirability of such a course is obvious. However, this<\/p>\n
does not mean that their place of posting should invariably be one of their<\/p>\n
choice, even though their preference may be taken into account while<\/p>\n
making the decision in accordance with the administrative needs. In the<\/p>\n
case of all-India services, the hardship resulting from the two being posted<\/p>\n
at different stations may be unavoidable at times particularly when they<\/p>\n
belong to different services and one of them cannot be transferred to the<\/p>\n
place of the other’s posting. While choosing the career and a particular<\/p>\n
service, the couple have to bear in mind this factor and be prepared to face<\/p>\n
such a hardship if the administrative needs and transfer policy do not permit<\/p>\n
the posting of both at one place without sacrifice of the requirements of the<\/p>\n
administration and needs of other employees. In such a case the couple have
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                    -7-<\/p>\n
to make their choice at the threshold between career prospects and family<\/p>\n
life. After giving preference to the career prospects by accepting such a<\/p>\n
promotion or any appointment in an all-India service with the incident of<\/p>\n
transfer to any place in India, subordinating the need of the couple living<\/p>\n
together at one station, they cannot as of right claim to be relieved of the<\/p>\n
ordinary incidents of all-India service and avoid transfer to a different place<\/p>\n
on the ground that the spouses thereby would be posted at different places.<\/p>\n
In addition, in the said case, the respondent therein voluntarily gave an<\/p>\n
undertaking that he was prepared to be posted at any place in India and on<\/p>\n
that basis got promotion from the clerical cadre to the officers’ grade and<\/p>\n
thereafter he sought to be relieved of that necessary incident of all-India<\/p>\n
service on the ground that his wife has to remain at Chandigarh. No doubt<\/p>\n
the guidelines require the two spouses to be posted at one place as far as<\/p>\n
practicable, but that does not enable any spouse to claim such a posting as<\/p>\n
of right if the departmental authorities do not consider it feasible. The only<\/p>\n
thing required is that the departmental authorities should consider this<\/p>\n
aspect along with the exigencies of administration and enable the two<\/p>\n
spouses to live together at one station if it is possible without any detriment<\/p>\n
to the administrative needs and the claim of other employees. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
petitioner cannot as a matter of right claim any right to be posted at any<\/p>\n
particular station and neither is the administration under any obligation to<\/p>\n
give him the right to choose the place of his posting although it is desirable<\/p>\n
that the instructions and policy issued by the government for the transfer of<\/p>\n
its employees are adhered to but these nevertheless do not confer any right<\/p>\n
on the petitioner so as to claim a legally enforceable right.<\/p>\n
                   As regards the allegation of mala fide or that the transfer
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                    -8-\n<\/p>\n
is politically motivated and a pre-planned transfer, it is not in dispute that<\/p>\n
an order of transfer may be assailed on the ground of mala fide. In the<\/p>\n
present case, however, there is no mala fide alleged against any person. It is<\/p>\n
not alleged as to whether any has been ill disposed towards the petitioner so<\/p>\n
as to see that he is transferred and that too in a pre-planned and politically<\/p>\n
motivated manner. Therefore, in the absence of any allegation against any<\/p>\n
particular official and in the absence of impleading such person eo nominee<\/p>\n
so as to enable him to answer the charge, it is evident that there is no<\/p>\n
allegation of mala fide, which would warrant interference of this Court.<\/p>\n
               It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
that in a similar matter i.e. CWP NO.1106 of 2008, the writ petition has<\/p>\n
been admitted. However, a perusal of the order dated 24.01.2008, which<\/p>\n
has been submitted before us, would show that only notice of motion has<\/p>\n
been issued and operation of the order of transfer has been stayed.        It is<\/p>\n
then submitted that in fact the said writ petition was admitted on<\/p>\n
22.05.2008.\n<\/p>\n
              Be that at it may. Mere admission of a writ petition does not<\/p>\n
amount to enunciation of any law which would operate as a binding<\/p>\n
precedent in the present case. Each case is to be considered and decided in<\/p>\n
its own facts and circumstances. In the present case, it may be noticed that<\/p>\n
the petitioner has been transferred within the district. It is stated that his<\/p>\n
transfer is at a distance of approximately 40 kms from the residence of the<\/p>\n
petitioner. The petitioner may, therefore, for such purposes approach the<\/p>\n
departmental authorities for the redressal of his grievances as held in Bank<\/p>\n
of India v. Jagjit Singh Mehta<\/a> (supra). Besides, it may be noticed that after<\/p>\n
the order of transfer was passed on 31.05.2007 (annexure P-3) and the
\n CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M)                                    -9-\n<\/p>\n
petitioner has filed the present petition 25.01.2008 i.e. after about 7 months.<\/p>\n
             In view of the above, we find no merit in this petition and the<\/p>\n
same is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                         (S.S. SARON)
\n                                                            JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                                      (RAJAN GUPTA)
\n                                                          JUDGE
\n03.10.2008
\namit\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 1275 of 2008 (O & M) Date of decision: October 3, 2008. Nirbair Singh ….. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & Ors. …. Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-50033","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - 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\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-29T16:23:01+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-29T16:23:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2197,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-29T16:23:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - 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\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-29T16:23:01+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-29T16:23:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008"},"wordCount":2197,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008","name":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-29T16:23:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirbair-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-ors-on-3-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nirbair Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 3 October, 2008"}]},{"@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\/50033","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=50033"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50033\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50033"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50033"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50033"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}