{"id":50964,"date":"2010-02-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010"},"modified":"2017-01-15T23:33:32","modified_gmt":"2017-01-15T18:03:32","slug":"chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/23000\/2007\t 5\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 23000 of 2007\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n \n=============================================================  \n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=============================================================\n \n\n \n\nCHANDAN\nSINGH AMARSINGH CHAUHAN - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nUNION\nOF INDIA OWING AND REPRESENTING - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nPB GOSWAMI for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nRULE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) :\n1, \nSERVED BY RPAD - (R) for Respondent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 16\/02\/2010\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.0\tBy<br \/>\nway of the present petition, the petitioner<br \/>\nhas inter alia prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment<br \/>\ndated 13th October 2003 passed by the Railway<br \/>\nClaims Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench at Ahmedabad in Case No.OA 200032,<br \/>\nwhereby the Tribunal has dismissed the application of the petitioner<br \/>\nfor getting compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.0\tThe<br \/>\nfacts of the case, if put in a nutshell, are as under :\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1\tOn<br \/>\n10th November 1999, the petitioner<br \/>\nhad gone to the Railway Station to see off his relative namely<br \/>\nHasubhai, who was travelling to Mumbai. The petitioner<br \/>\nhad purchased the Platform Ticket No.907798 and had entered in<br \/>\nPlatform No.1 since he wanted to go to Platform No.3.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.2\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner<br \/>\nwas standing near the staircases of the bridge of Platform No.3 and<br \/>\nat that time, the special pilgrimage train was arriving from the Yard<br \/>\non Platform No.3. On account of heavy rush of pilgrims and public at<br \/>\nlarge, the pilgrims were trying to catch the train in hurry. Due to<br \/>\nunbearable pushes of the passengers on Platform No.3, the petitioner<br \/>\nwas thrown out and he fell down from the Platform and got himself<br \/>\ntrapped between the train on the track and the platform. As a result<br \/>\nof the same, the petitioner<br \/>\nsustained several grievous injuries, including amputation of his<br \/>\nright elbow.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.3\tIn<br \/>\npursuance of the said incident, the petitioner<br \/>\nlodged a claim for Rs.4 lakhs under Section 124-A of The Railways<br \/>\nAct, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the Act&#8217;) before the Railway<br \/>\nClaims Tribunal at Ahmedabad being Case no.OA-2000032. However, the<br \/>\nsaid application came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 13th<br \/>\nOctober 2003. Hence, this petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.0\tMr.P.B.\n<\/p>\n<p>Goswami, learned<br \/>\nadvocate for the petitioner,<br \/>\nhas submitted that the judgment rendered by the Tribunal is unjust<br \/>\nand improper and passed without appreciating the facts of the case<br \/>\nand evidence on record. It is submitted that though the incident in<br \/>\nquestion is covered under Section 124 of the Act, the Tribunal has<br \/>\nfailed to take into consideration the same and it has observed that<br \/>\n since the incident does not fall within the definition of<br \/>\n&#8216;untoward incident&#8217; as per Section 124 of the Act, no compensation is<br \/>\npayable to the applicant .\n<\/p>\n<p>3.1\tIt<br \/>\nis submitted that though the petitioner<br \/>\nwas bona fide passenger of the Railways since he was holding Platform<br \/>\nTicket No.907798 dated 10th November 1999 and the incident<br \/>\noccurred near the Platform No.3, the railway authority is responsible<br \/>\nfor the same and, therefore, the petitioner<br \/>\nis entitled to get compensation from the respondent-authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.2\tIt<br \/>\nis submitted that the petitioner<br \/>\nhad received grievous injuries and his right elbow was amputated and,<br \/>\ntherefore, he is not able to perform his day to day affairs. On<br \/>\naccount of the said incident, he has become dependent and therefore<br \/>\nalso, the compensation as prayed for may kindly be granted in the<br \/>\ninterest of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.0\tHaving<br \/>\nconsidered the arguments advanced by the learned<br \/>\nadvocate for the petitioner,<br \/>\nperusing the documents produced on record as well as the impugned<br \/>\njudgment, it transpires that the incident in question took place on<br \/>\n10th November 1999 and the petitioner<br \/>\npreferred an application for obtaining compensation in the year 2000,<br \/>\nwhich came to be decided vide judgment dated 13th October<br \/>\n2003. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner<br \/>\nhad an alternative remedy to prefer an appeal against the impugned<br \/>\njudgment. However, on account of delay of more than three years, the<br \/>\npetitioner<br \/>\nhas chosen not to prefer an appeal and has preferred the present<br \/>\npetition. However, the petitioner<br \/>\napproached this Court after a period of more than three years and in<br \/>\nview of  the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shiv<br \/>\nDass v. Union of India and others, reported in (2007) 9 SCC 1330,<br \/>\nthe petitioner<br \/>\nis not entitled to get any compensation after a period of three<br \/>\nyears. It would be beneficial to reproduce the relevant paragraph<br \/>\nNos.10 and 11 of the said decision as under :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t 10.<br \/>\n\tIn the case of pension the cause of action actually<br \/>\ncontinues from month to month. That, however, cannot be a ground to<br \/>\noverlook delay in filing the petition. It would depend upon the fact<br \/>\nof each case. If petition is filed beyond a reasonable period say<br \/>\nthree years normally the Court would reject the same or restrict the<br \/>\nrelief which could be granted to a reasonable period of about three<br \/>\nyears. The High Court did not examine whether on merit appellant had<br \/>\na case.  If on merits it would have found that there was no scope for<br \/>\ninterference, it would have dismissed the writ petition on that score<br \/>\nalone.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.<br \/>\n\t \tIn the peculiar circumstances, we remit the matter to the High<br \/>\nCourt to hear the writ petition on merits. If it is found that the<br \/>\nclaim for disability pension is sustainable in law, then it would<br \/>\nmould the relief but in no event grant any relief for a period<br \/>\nexceeding three years from the date of presentation of the writ<br \/>\npetition. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on<br \/>\nthe merits as to whether appellant&#8217;s claim for disability pension is<br \/>\nmaintainable or not.  If it is sans merit, the High Court naturally<br \/>\nwould dismiss the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.1\tIt<br \/>\nis pertinent to note that the petitioner<br \/>\nhad made the said application for getting compensation before the<br \/>\nTribunal under Section 124 of the Act on account of the said untoward<br \/>\nincident. The definition of an &#8216;untoward incident&#8217;  falls under<br \/>\nSection 123(c) of the Act, whereby it has been categorically<br \/>\nindicated that the incident in question does not fall under an<br \/>\nuntoward incident. It would be beneficial to reproduce the provision<br \/>\nof Section 123(c) of the Act as under, which provides for definition<br \/>\nof an &#8216;untoward incident&#8217; :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t 123(c)<br \/>\n: &#8216;untoward incident&#8217; means :\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">\t(1)<\/span><\/p>\n<p>(i) the commission of a terrorist act within the meaning of<br \/>\nsub-section (1) of section (3) of the Terrorist and Disruptive<br \/>\nActivities (Prevention) Act, 1987; or <\/p>\n<p>\t(ii)<br \/>\nthe making of a violent attack or the commission of robbery or<br \/>\ndacoity; or <\/p>\n<p>\t(iii)<br \/>\nthe indulging in rioting, shoot-out or arson, by any person in or on<br \/>\nany train carrying passengers, or in a waiting hall, cloak room or<br \/>\nreservation or booking office or on any platform or in any other<br \/>\nplace within the precincts of a railway station; or <\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">\t(2)<\/span><br \/>\nthe accidental falling of any passenger from a train carrying<br \/>\npassengers.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.2\tLooking<br \/>\nto the aforesaid definition of &#8216;untoward incident&#8217; it is crystal<br \/>\nclear that the case of the petitioner<br \/>\ndoes not fall under the said definition. Thus, when the case of the<br \/>\npetitioner<br \/>\ndoes not fall under the said definition of an &#8216;untoward incident&#8217;, he<br \/>\nis estopped from seeking compensation under the said head. Further,<br \/>\nthe Tribunal while passing the judgment has relief upon the following<br \/>\ndocumentary evidence on record :\n<\/p>\n<p>Original<br \/>\n\tPlatform Ticket No.907798 dated 10.11.1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>Xerox<br \/>\n\tcopy of the memo issued by SS-ADI to SI GRP.\n<\/p>\n<p>Certified<br \/>\n\tcopy of the place of occurrence.\n<\/p>\n<p>Injury<br \/>\n\tcertificate issued by a private hospital.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.3\tIn<br \/>\nview of above, it is apparent that the Tribunal after taking into<br \/>\nconsideration the pros and cons of the matter and after appreciating<br \/>\nthe documents on record, has rendered the judgment by assigning just<br \/>\nand proper reasons. I am in complete agreement with the reasons<br \/>\nassigned by the Tribunal. Thus, I do not find any illegality in the<br \/>\njudgment impugned in the petition and, therefore, the present<br \/>\npetition is required to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.0\tFor<br \/>\nthe foregoing reasons, the present petition fails and is,<br \/>\naccordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.<br \/>\nInterim relief, if any, stands hereby vacated.\n<\/p>\n<p>(K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>Jhaveri, J)<\/p>\n<p>Aakar<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/23000\/2007 5\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 23000 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ============================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-50964","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - 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\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-15T18:03:32+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-15T18:03:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1259,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-15T18:03:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - 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\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-15T18:03:32+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-15T18:03:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010"},"wordCount":1259,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010","name":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-15T18:03:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandan-vs-union-on-16-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chandan vs Union on 16 February, 2010"}]},{"@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\/50964","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=50964"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50964\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50964"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50964"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50964"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}