{"id":87675,"date":"2008-08-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008"},"modified":"2016-06-11T21:30:32","modified_gmt":"2016-06-11T16:00:32","slug":"col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 2008<\/div>\n
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                         Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00464 dated 23.4.2007\n                           Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant      -          Col. N. R. Kurup. Kerala\nRespondent         -      Army Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (MoD)\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
      By an application of 11.7.06 Col. (Retd) N.R. Kurup of Chettemcoon,
\nTellicherry, Kerala made an application to the CPIO, ECHS, Adjutant General’s
\nBranch, Army Headquarters seeking information regarding the functioning of the
\nECHS, Polyclinics. On not receiving a response, he moved a first appeal on
\n30.8.06 before the Director General, DC&W, Army Headquarters, pleading as
\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n
         a)   “(a) In the absence of any direction in the Briefs on ECHS
\n              published in the website or Government of India orders, that
\n              “the medicines prescribed by the TREATING DOCTOR to
\n              the patient after due examination is to be personally
\n              collected by the patient Authority of MD., ECHS to impose
\n              such inhuman direction to deprive the chronic sick patients
\n              hailing from far away places from the polyclinic, the ECHS
\n              facilities guaranteed by Government in above cases.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         b)   Authority under which an MBBA doctor who is not the
\n              TREATING DOCTOR of the patient is ordered by the MD,
\n              ECHS to increase or decrease the time-tested dosage of
\n              medicines prescribed by the SPECIALIST TREATING
\n              DOCTOR of the patient without referring the chronic patient
\n              back to the Specialist for opinion.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         c)   Accountability for damages or deterioration of condition or
\n              loss of life caused by such unethical medical practice by an
\n              MBBS doctor on orders of MD, ECHS.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         d)   When the GOI orders of 30.12.2002 categorically order
\n              ECHS to ensure that no ESM pensioner is denied ECHS
\n              facilities for ANY REASON, authority under which the Station
\n              Commander, Kannur\/MD,ECHS has formulated the present
\n              strategy su moto only to deny this facility fully to ESM hailing
\n              from places far away from the Polyclinic.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                             1<\/span><\/p>\n
       e)     Action taken report of MD\/ECHS on the Appellant’s
\n             Complaint on practice of unlawful and unethical practice of
\n             Polyclinic resulting in denial of the facilities guaranteed by
\n             the Government of India to ESM hailing from faraway places.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      f)     Authority of MD , ECHS to over rule the ESM friendly policy
\n             of Government by formulating unauthorised practice to make
\n             it ESM hostile.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     In response to this appeal Col. Kurup received a letter from Col. A.K.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Sharma, Director, HRC dated 28th Sept., 2006 in which he stated that ECHS had
\nalready sent a reply to Col. Kurup through a letter of 12th Sept., 06, a copy of
\nwhich was attached. Thereafter Col. Kurup received a detailed reply on 15.12.06
\nfrom Col. S. Thapar, Director (Media) for Vice Chief of the Army Staff. Questions
\nand answers, therefore, read as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       S.  Question                            Answer\n       No.\n       a.  In the absence of any               1.    No    doctor   prescribes\n           direction in the Briefs on          medicines without examining a\n           ECHS published in the               patient or knowing his clinical\n           website or Government of            details.\n           India orders, that \"the\n<\/pre>\n
           medicines prescribed by             2. Since domiciliary treatment
\n           the TREATING DOCTOR is              has not been allowed by the
\n           to be personally collected          Govt in ECHS, all patients have
\n           by the patient, Authority of        to come to the ECHS Polyclinic
\n           MD., ECHS to impose such            for examination by a Doctor.
\n           inhuman      direction    to        Since they come to Polyclinic
\n           deprive the poor old sick           they collect the medicines also.
\n           chronic patients hailing
\n           from far away places from           3. In case a patient’s clinical
\n           the polyclinic, the ECHS            condition requires examination
\n           facilities guaranteed by            by a specialist he is either
\n           Government       in    above        examined by the specialist in
\n           orders.                             Polyclinic or a specialist in
\n                                               Military\/ empanelled hospital
\n                                               after being referred from the
\n                                               Polyclinic.\n<\/p>\n
                                               4. The medicines prescribed by
\n                                               the treating doctor (including
\n                                               specialist) are provided to the<\/p>\n
                                           2<\/span>
\n     patients from the Polyclinic.<\/p>\n
    Prescription in civil practice,
\n    including      by      empanelled
\n    hospitals is by ‘Brand Names’,
\n    where      as    prescription   at
\n    Polyclinic\/ Service hospitals are
\n    by     ‘Generic     Names’     (as
\n    recommended by World Health
\n    Organisation).       If required,
\n    Doctors at Polyclinic provide
\n    substitute ‘Generic’ drug with
\n    same composition as prescribed
\n    ‘Branded’ drug. This is done as
\n    per Govt Orders since Generic
\n    Drugs procured in bulk are
\n    cheaper     (similar    policy   is
\n    followed by Central Govt Health
\n    Scheme).\n<\/p>\n
    5. Chronic patients are also
\n    required to be periodically
\n    reviewed by the treating Doctors
\n    before prescribing the drugs
\n    again. Frequency of reviews is
\n    based purely on professional
\n    opinion of treating doctor. This is
\n    for the benefit of the patient since
\n    there may be a requirement to
\n    change      the     drug\/   dosage
\n    depending        upon       medical
\n    condition of the patient. As per
\n    directions of Director General of
\n    Armed Forces Medical Services,
\n    Servicing       Armed        Forces
\n    personnel are reviewed by the
\n    doctor every month even if they
\n    are suffering from chronic
\n    diseases.\n<\/p>\n
    6. Though review of a patient
\n    may be carried out by a
\n    Polyclinic   Medical   Officer,
\n    change of the dosage of
\n    medicine    prescribed by    a
\n    specialist is usually always
\n    carried out by the concerned<\/p>\n
3<\/span>
\n                                      specialist. However, in certain
\n                                     situations,        to       prevent
\n                                     deterioration in a patient’s
\n                                     condition    Polyclinic    Medical
\n                                     Officer may change the dosage if
\n                                     the specialist is not available. In
\n                                     such a case the patient is
\n                                     referred to the concerned
\n                                     specialist    at      the   earliest
\n                                     opportunity.\n<\/p>\n
                                     7. The collection of medicines by
\n                                     the patient as a policy is also
\n                                     necessary to prevent misuse.\n<\/p>\n
                                     8. In view of the petition made by
\n                                     you, an exception was made by
\n                                     allowing your representative to
\n                                     collect drugs vide ECHS letter
\n                                     No. B\/49706\/MOD\/AG\/ ECHS
\n                                     dated 12th Sep 06. This was an
\n                                     amelioration of your problem
\n                                     projected by you to the President
\n                                     of India through e-mail on 16th
\n                                     July 06 and received by ECHS
\n                                     on 7th Sept 06 from MOD.\n<\/p>\n
b.   Authority under which an See above
\n     MBBA doctor is ordered to
\n     increase or decrease the
\n     time tested dosage of
\n     medicines prescribed by a
\n     specialist without referring
\n     the patient back to him for
\n     opinion.\n<\/p>\n
c.   Accountability for damages      Para 1 (c ): Accountability for
\n     or deterioration of condition   Damages: No unethical practice
\n     or loss of life caused by       is allowed as per ECHS rules
\n     such unauthorized medical       and suitable action will be taken
\n     practice by an MBBS doctor      for any aberration. However, it
\n     merely on Orders of MD,         may be appreciated that a doctor
\n     ECHS.                           proceeds with the treatment of
\n                                     an aliment for betterment of the
\n                                     patient.    Apprehension of the
\n                                     patient to reflect fear of damage<\/p>\n
                                4<\/span>
\n                                       from    the   treatment    being
\n                                      provided by a qualified doctor is
\n                                      thus misplaced.\n<\/p>\n
d.   When the GOI orders of           Para 1 (d): Denial of ECHS
\n     30.12.2002     categorically     Facilities:
\n     order ECHS to ensure that        1. The Govt Order No. 22
\n     no ESM pensioner is              (1)\/01\/US(WE)\/D(Res) dated 30th
\n     denied ECHS facilities for       Dec 02 sanctioning the ECHS
\n     ANY REASON, authority            scheme has made it voluntary to
\n     under which the Station          join the scheme for all those who
\n     Commander,                       retired prior to the issue of the
\n     Kannur\/MD,ECHS           has     order.\n<\/p>\n
     formulated the present
\n     strategy to deny this facility   2. The same order mentions the
\n     fully to ESM hailing from        location of all the ECHS
\n     places far away from the         Polyclinics. Before becoming a
\n     Polyclinic.                      member,      you   could    have
\n                                      analysed in greater detail about
\n                                      the effect of Kannur Polyclinic
\n                                      being located far from your
\n                                      residence.\n<\/p>\n
                                      3. No member is being denied
\n                                      medical\/ ECHS facilities.\n<\/p>\n
e.   Action taken report of           Para 1(e):Action by MD, ECHS:\n<\/p>\n
     MD\/ECHS           on       the   As mentioned earlier, in this
\n     Complaint on practice of         particular case purely on request
\n     unlawful     and     unethical   of the individual and on
\n     practice      of    Polyclinic   humanitarian             grounds,
\n     resulting in denying of the      permission was granted for any
\n     facilities guaranteed by the     authorized person to collect
\n     Government of India.             medicines on your behalf. In our
\n                                      opinion the Polyclinic has not
\n                                      undertaken any unlawful or
\n                                      unethical practice by asking you
\n                                      to collect medicines or present
\n                                      your self before the doctor for
\n                                      periodic      review       before
\n                                      medication      is     prescribed\/
\n                                      reviewed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
       In the meantime, appellant had already moved a complaint before us for
\nfailure to respond under File No. CIC\/AT\/A\/2006\/00472. This was duly heard
\nand the decision of the Commission dated 18.1.07 was as below :\n<\/p>\n
       “The matter was heard in the Commission where the appellant was
\n       heard through his representative & respondents Brig. Nair and Brig.
\n       Malik.    A reply has been given to the appellant on dated
\n       15.12.2008. The Commission has directed the representatives of
\n       the appellant to collect the same from the respondents and pass it
\n       on to the appellant. Should the appellant still need to present his
\n       second appeal he may approach the Commission afresh for
\n       hearing.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The present case is, therefore, an appeal made directly to us in accordance
\nwith the directions of this Commission against the information received in the
\nletter of 15.12.06 which has been quoted above. Appellant’s prayer before us is
\nas follows :\n<\/p>\n
       (a)     That the respondent may kindly be ordered to provide
\n               information requested.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (b)     That this Hon’ble Commission may kindly consider
\n               imposition of penalties stipulated in section 20 of the Act.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (c)     To consider the necessity for recommending for an enquiry
\n               under Section 18 (2) of the RTI Act for framing false report in
\n               judicial proceedings.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (d)     For recommending any other action as deemed necessary in
\n               such an arbitrary defiance of the Right to Information Act by
\n               Defense Service Officers.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The appeal was heard by Video-Conference on 6.8.08.            Appellant Col.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Kurup, when contacted over telephone No. 0490-2320590, opted not to be
\npresent. The following were present in NIC Studio, Delhi :\n<\/p>\n
       RESPONDENTS
\n           Brig P. R. Sangam, SM, DDG, RTI & CPIO of INQ of MoD (Army).
\n           Col Binay, Dir, ECHS.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           Maj M. Gahlot, GSO-1 (Legal), RTI Cell.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                          6<\/span><\/p>\n
          Maj. Manisha Gahlot GSO-1 Legal submitted the following chronology in
\nprocessing the application of Col. Kurup :\n<\/p>\n
   (a)       “19 Sep 06: Application dated 30th Aug 2006 was received from
\n             Dir HRC.\n<\/p>\n
   (b)       20 Sep 06: The application was processed. Sir HRC was
\n             informed by this office that application was not received earlier.\n<\/p>\n
   (c)       28 Sept 06: Central Organisation ECHS forwarded their reply to
\n             the applicant vide their letter No. B\/49806-MoD\/Ag\/ECHS dated
\n             12 Sept 2006, provisioning requested information.\n<\/p>\n
   (d)       12 Oct 06: Applicant forwarded his appeal to the CIC.\n<\/p>\n
   (e)       28 Nov 06: Hearing Notice received from the CIC.\n<\/p>\n
   (f)       15 Dec 06: reply forwarded to the applicant.\n<\/p>\n
   (g)       26 Dec 06: Dir Media clarified our stand vide letter No.
\n             A\/810027\/RTI\/164\/M\/PI relating to processing of the case at
\n             IHQ of MoD (Army).\n<\/p>\n
   (h)       16 Jan 07: The applicant asked for additional information
\n             pertaining to a ‘Photocopy of an intimation letter received by
\n             CPIO from HE. The President of India in response to an e-mail
\n             from the applicant dated 16 July 2006’.\n<\/p>\n
   (i)       18 Jan 07: the Hon’ble CIC issued orders closing the matter
\n             after directing the representative of the appellant to collect the
\n             reply forwarded by the respondents on 15 Dec 06.\n<\/p>\n
   (j)       09 Feb 07: Addl information sought by the applicant vide his
\n             application dated 16 Jan 07 was provided to the applicant.\n<\/p>\n
   (k)       27 Feb 07: Addl inputs asked as fresh request.\n<\/p>\n
   (l)       03 Apr 07: Addl information as sought in 27 Feb 07 application
\n             was provided.”\n<\/p>\n
She also submitted as follows :\n<\/p>\n
          “It is also brought to your kind notice that a meeting on the case
\n          was held on 9th Jan 2007 at the CIC before Mr. A. Tiwari. Brig
\n          Satish Malik, Deputy Managing Director ECHS along with Brig
\n          Satish Nari, DDG PI attended the meeting. The case was
\n          presented before the CIC. Legal counsel of the applicant, Mr.
\n          Agrawal was also present who wanted a fresh date which was
\n          declined by the Hon’ble Information Commissioner stating that a
\n          copy of the reply given to the applicant should be provided to the
\n          Counsel and in case, the applicant is not satisfied, he may
\n          represent again for ‘fresh date’.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Brig. P.R. Sangam, S.M., DDG RTI submitted that the earlier application of
\n11.7.06 was received in the ECHS but was not treated as an RTI application and
\nonly as a complaint to which a response was sent on 12.9.06.                After the<\/p>\n
                                           7<\/span>
\n complaint was received from the Director HRC on 19.9.06, the matter was
\nprocessed further and the letter of 28th Sept., 06 sent to applicant. It is admitted,
\nhowever, that the complete information was only provided on 15.12.06 in
\nresponse to the first appeal. Brig. Sangam also submitted that basically the
\napplication of 11.7.06 from Col. Kurup was a grievance on not receiving
\nmedicine.   Col.   Binay, Director, ECHS who is also present in the hearing
\nsubmitted that exceptions were made from established procedure to see that Col.
\nKurup received the medicine sought .\n<\/p>\n
                                DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
     This appeal has been heard on the basis of an earlier decision by this
\nCommission of 18.1.07 reproduced above, and, therefore, addresses only the
\nquestion of the response provided on 15.12.06 to the questions asked by
\nappellant Col. Kurup. From the questions and answers quoted above, it will be
\nclear that each of the questions stands answered. However, from a reading of
\nthe appeal, we find that appellant Col. Kurup is dissatisfied with the functioning
\nof ECHS, the processes adopted by it and the perceived lacunae in addressing
\nthe medical requirements of elderly and retired personnel, particularly, those
\nlocated at a distance from the ECHS Units. Col. Binay submitted that the ECHS
\nis about 5 years old and is still in the process of evolution. Its processes are in
\nfact at present under review. It is, therefore, recommended to ECHS that the
\nsuggestions and apprehensions of appellant Col. Kurup may be taken into
\nconsideration in redesigning the functioning of ECHS.\n<\/p>\n
      On the question of delay in response to the initial application of 11.7.06,
\nBrig. Sangam has submitted that ECHS does not have a CPIO of its own. RTI
\napplications addressed to ECHS are serviced by CPIO-Army, Ministry of
\nDefence. The ECHS, therefore, had received the application from Col. Kurup as
\na complaint and not as a request for information, hence the reply of 12.9.06 in
\nwhich each question had not sought to be answered. This is an unacceptable<\/p>\n
                                         8<\/span>
\n explanation. Under the RTI Act every Unit is to have at the very least an APIO.
\nEven if there was no such authority the matter should have been referred
\nimmediately to the CPIO Army since it clearly states the sections with sub-
\nsections of the RTI Act under which the questions had been raised. However,
\nsince there was no CPIO designated for the purpose, we cannot hold any
\nauthority liable for the delay and, therefore, consider imposing penalty. Ministry
\nof Defence will, however, review this system within one week of the date of issue
\nof this Decision Notice and take steps to ensure that such a fault does not recur
\nto ensure that an RTI application addressed to any Unit of the Ministry of
\nDefence is addressed immediately on receipt.\n<\/p>\n
      This appeal is disposed of accordingly. Announced in the hearing. Notice
\nof this decision be given free of cost to the parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n6.8.2008<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO
\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
(Pankaj Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n6.8.2008<\/p>\n
                                           9<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 2008 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00464 dated 23.4.2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant – Col. N. R. Kurup. Kerala Respondent – Army Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (MoD) Facts : By an application of 11.7.06 Col. […]<\/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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87675","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nCol. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 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\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-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=\"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-11T16:00:32+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-11T16:00:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2388,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-11T16:00:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 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":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 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\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-11T16:00:32+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-11T16:00:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008"},"wordCount":2388,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008","name":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of ... on 6 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-11T16:00:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-n-r-kurup-vs-army-headquarters-ministry-of-on-6-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Col. N. R. Kurup vs Army Headquarters, Ministry Of … on 6 August, 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\/87675","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=87675"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87675\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87675"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87675"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87675"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}