{"id":87732,"date":"2009-04-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2"},"modified":"2015-11-25T18:57:35","modified_gmt":"2015-11-25T13:27:35","slug":"anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","title":{"rendered":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009<\/div>\n
                      CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003                          -1-\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                CASE NO.: CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003\n\n                                   DATE OF DECISION: April 29, 2009\n\nANISH SHARMA                                          ...PETITIONER\n\n                                VERSUS\n\nUNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH ETC.                       ...RESPONDENTS\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.\n       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR.\n\n\nPRESENT: MR. I.S. SIDHU, ADVOCATE\n         FOR THE PETITIONER.\n\n             MR. GURINDERJIT SINGH, ADVOCATE\n             FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3.\n\n             MR. T.P.S. CHAWLA, ADVOCATE\n             FOR RESPONDENT NO.4.\n\n\nASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
             The challenge in the writ petition is to the order dated<\/p>\n
23.5.2003, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘the<\/p>\n
Tribunal’) vide which the Original Application filed by the petitioner was<\/p>\n
dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
             Briefly the facts of the case are that in pursuance to<\/p>\n
advertisement (Annexure A-3), issued by the Director Principal,<\/p>\n
Government Medical College & Hospital, Chandigarh the petitioner Anish<\/p>\n
Sharma as well as respondent No.4 Mamta Sharma alongwith others applied<\/p>\n
for the post of Telephone Operator in the pay scale of Rs.3120-5160\/-. The<\/p>\n
eligible candidates were interviewed by a Selection Committee and on their<\/p>\n
recommendation respondent No.4 Mamta Sharma was appointed as
\n                         CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003                           -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
Telephone Operator vide order dated 6.8.2002.           She joined her duties<\/p>\n
thereafter and has been working since then. The petitioner filed petition<\/p>\n
before the Tribunal for quashing the appointment of Mamta Sharma on the<\/p>\n
ground that one of the Members of the Selection Committee, namely,<\/p>\n
Sh.Arun Sharma, respondent No.3, Incharge Communication, Government<\/p>\n
Medical College & Hospital, Chandigarh was the brother-in-law of<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 and his presence as a Member of the Selection Committee<\/p>\n
at the time of interview shows that there was likelihood of bias. Reliance in<\/p>\n
this regard has been placed on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court<\/p>\n
in Ashok Kumar Yadav vs. State of Haryana, AIR<\/a> 1987 Supreme Court 454.<\/p>\n
             Separate replies on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 were filed before the Tribunal.         In the reply filed by<\/p>\n
Sh.Arun Sharma, respondent No.3, it was averred that although he was one<\/p>\n
of the Members of the Selection Committee, but he did not take part in the<\/p>\n
interview process at the time when respondent No.4 appeared for interview<\/p>\n
and hence the selection process cannot be faulted. It has also been averred<\/p>\n
that the selection was absolutely fair and impartial.<\/p>\n
             Apart from the above, it has also been contended on behalf of<\/p>\n
the respondent that the interview was conducted by the Selection Committee<\/p>\n
which was chaired by the Director\/Principal, Government Medical College<\/p>\n
& Hospital, Chandigarh and the Joint Director as well as two senior Doctors<\/p>\n
of the same College\/Hospital who were part of the Selection Committee. It<\/p>\n
is highly unlikely and improbable that respondent No.3 who is merely<\/p>\n
Incharge Communication in the Government Medical College & Hospital,,<\/p>\n
Sector 32, Chandigarh would have such a huge impact on the selection<\/p>\n
process so as to hoodwink or win-over all other four Members who were
\n                        CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003                            -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
much superior to him in rank and status.        It was further averred that<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 has been selected after due consideration of her merit by<\/p>\n
the Selection Committee which did not include Sh.Arun Sharma, respondent<\/p>\n
No.3.\n<\/p>\n
            It was also contended by the counsel for the petitioner that<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 did not fulfill the requisite experience of having worked on<\/p>\n
at least 20 x 220 lines in a reputed Government organization for one year<\/p>\n
and further that the experience certificate issued by M\/s Sanchi Security<\/p>\n
Private Ltd., respondent No.5 in favour of respondent No.4 is fake.<\/p>\n
            In reply to this averment it has been averred in the written<\/p>\n
statement that experience certificate issued to respondent No.4 and the<\/p>\n
petitioner has been issued by the same Company, i.e. respondent No.5<\/p>\n
which is an agency through which both the petitioner and the answering<\/p>\n
respondent were appointed on contractual basis. It was also submitted that<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 is possessing certificate of Telephone Operator-cum-<\/p>\n
Receptionist (Vocational Course) issued by the Hindustan Marine<\/p>\n
Electronic Institute based in Ludhiana. The certificate is duly recognized by<\/p>\n
the State of Punjab for the purpose of appointing persons to the posts of<\/p>\n
Telephone Operator etc. It is thus argued that the Tribunal has rightly come<\/p>\n
to the conclusion that respondent no.4 possessed the requisite qualification.<\/p>\n
            We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. A<\/p>\n
perusal of the aforementioned fact shows that although Sh. Arun Sharma,<\/p>\n
respondent No.3 was brother-in-law of respondent No.4, but he had excused<\/p>\n
himself when respondent No.4 was called for interview. In the present case,<\/p>\n
there is no positive averment that respondent No.3 Sh. Arun Sharma had in<\/p>\n
any manner espoused the case of respondent No.4 and helped her in getting
\n                         CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003                            -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
selected. Although respondent No.3 was one of the Members of the<\/p>\n
Selection Committee, but was merely Incharge Communication in the<\/p>\n
Government Medical College & Hospital. All the 4 other Members of the<\/p>\n
Committee were highly superior in rank and status than respondent No.3.<\/p>\n
There is nothing on record to suggest that respondent No.3 had influence on<\/p>\n
the senior Members of the Selection Committee to such an extent that he<\/p>\n
could have got respondent No.4 selected. Thus, we are of the considered<\/p>\n
opinion that respondent No.4 was not appointed to the post of Telephone<\/p>\n
Operator because of any favourtism on the part of respondent No.3, but on<\/p>\n
her own merit.\n<\/p>\n
            Regarding the second point raised by the counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner that respondent No.4 did not have the requisite experience of<\/p>\n
having worked on at least 20 x 200 lines in a reputed firm or in a<\/p>\n
Government Organization for one year, we find no merit in the same also.<\/p>\n
A perusal of the experience certificate (Annexure A-4) issued in favour of<\/p>\n
respondent No.4 shows that Smt. Mamta Sharma has worked as EPABX<\/p>\n
Operator (24 x 240 lines) on Model P-30 (BPL) in Sanchi Security Private<\/p>\n
Ltd. from 16.12.1999 till the date of certificate, i.e. 8.5.2002 on contractual<\/p>\n
basis. The certificate itself makes it clear that respondent No.4 did have the<\/p>\n
requisite experience. The capacity of the aforementioned Exchange has<\/p>\n
been stated to be 64 x 750 lines and thus, respondent No.4 did have the<\/p>\n
experience as mentioned in the advertisement.\n<\/p>\n
            Apart from the above, in Madan Lal & Ors. Vs. State of<\/p>\n
Jammu & Kashmir, JT 1995(2) SC 291, it has been held that if a candidate<\/p>\n
takes a calculated chance and appears in an interview then, only because the<\/p>\n
result of the interview is not palatable to him, he cannot turn around and
\n                        CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003                            -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
contend that process of interview was unfair or the Selection Committee<\/p>\n
was not properly constituted. In the present case, the petitioner having<\/p>\n
taken part in the selection process for the post of Telephone Operator and<\/p>\n
having failed to make the grade, cannot question the legality of the selection<\/p>\n
process which in our considered opinion is just and fair. In view of the<\/p>\n
above, we find no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n                                        (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)\n                                              JUDGE\n\n\n\nApril 29, 2009                             (NIRMALJIT KAUR)\nGulati                                         JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CASE NO.: CWP No.8919-CAT of 2003 DATE OF DECISION: April 29, 2009 ANISH SHARMA …PETITIONER VERSUS UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH ETC. …RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH […]<\/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-87732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-25T13:27:35+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-25T13:27:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\"},\"wordCount\":1102,\"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\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\",\"name\":\"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-25T13:27:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-25T13:27:35+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-25T13:27:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2"},"wordCount":1102,"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\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2","name":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-25T13:27:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anish-sharma-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-etc-on-29-april-2009-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anish Sharma vs Union Territory Chandigarh Etc on 29 April, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87732","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=87732"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87732\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}