{"id":87788,"date":"2008-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008"},"modified":"2019-04-02T16:48:49","modified_gmt":"2019-04-02T11:18:49","slug":"shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court<\/div>\n
Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi<\/div>\n
                     CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10221 OF 1999\n\n\n                     SHYAM NARAIN SINHA, son of Late Ram Barai Lal, resident of Mohalla\n                           Katirabag, Ara, P.S. Ara Nawadah District - Bhojpur\n                                                                     ------------(Petitioner)\n                                         Versus\n\n                     1. Managing Director, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Frazer\n                        Road Patna.\n                     2. Branch Manager, Bihar State Fionancial Corporation, Branch Ara,\n                        Mohalla Pakri, P.O. Ara District - Bhojpur\n                     3. Sanjay Chopra Maharana Pratap Nagar, P.O. Nawadah, Arrah,\n                        Bhojpur.\n\n                                                                      --------(Respondents)\n                                      ------------------\n<\/pre>\n
                     For The Petitioner : Mr. Kai Das Chatterjee, Adv.\n<\/p>\n
                                          Mr. Amlesh Kr. Verma, Adv.\n<\/p>\n
                     For The Respondent :          Mr. Girijesh Kumar, Advocate.<\/p>\n
                                      PRESENT<\/p>\n
               THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI<\/p>\n
A. K. Tripathi, J.               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned<\/p>\n
                       counsel for the State.\n<\/p>\n
                                 Petitioner is the father of the original promoter. One<\/p>\n
                       Kamlesh Kumar Sinha set up an industry on disbursement of<\/p>\n
                       certain amount of loan in the name of M\/s Kamlesh Engineering<\/p>\n
                       Works located at Club Road, Arrah. The sanction of loan in<\/p>\n
                       favour of the original promoter was made some time in the year<\/p>\n
                       1986 and the term loan was of about 3.05 lakhs. Some<\/p>\n
                       repayment till 26.12.1989 was made by him but thereafter in the<\/p>\n
                       year 1990 he became traceless. In absence of repayment the<\/p>\n
                       respondents Bihar State Financial Corporation (hereinafter<\/p>\n
                       referred to as the ‘corporation’) initiated a proceeding under
\n                     -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
section 29 of the Act. Out of concern or may be family pride<\/p>\n
father of the original promoter (the present writ petitioner)<\/p>\n
decided to take responsibility upon himself not only to settle the<\/p>\n
dues of the corporation but may be even run the Unit. He<\/p>\n
decided to communicate with the respondent’s corporation and<\/p>\n
wrote many a letters in the year 1997. The matter was<\/p>\n
considered and certain terms and conditions were laid down for<\/p>\n
the petitioner to fulfill for a reconsideration of withdrawing the<\/p>\n
proceeding under section 29 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
         The earliest offer made by the corporation to the<\/p>\n
petitioner is dated 22.03.1999, and has been brought on record<\/p>\n
as Annexure – 4, not all the terms and conditions need be<\/p>\n
noted in the present order but some of them are that the<\/p>\n
petitioner was given a months time to repay 5.52 lakhs in one<\/p>\n
lump sum. Since corporation had found a purchaser who had<\/p>\n
deposited Rs. 60,000\/- (sixty thousand only) the same had to<\/p>\n
be also paid back and 18% interest has to be borne by the<\/p>\n
petitioner if the refund of Rs. 60,000\/- (sixty thousand only)   to<\/p>\n
the purchaser had to be made. There are several other<\/p>\n
conditions with regard to the rate of interest which on a reading<\/p>\n
does give a feel to the court that it was loaded against the<\/p>\n
petitioner. The court also gets a feeling that the corporation did<\/p>\n
not have patience and indulgence for the petitioner.<\/p>\n
         Annexure – 2 is the offer made to the purchaser by the<\/p>\n
corporation. The purchaser was supposed to one Sanjay Kumar
\n                     -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
Chopra for whom the consideration money fixed for the Unit<\/p>\n
was 2.95 lakhs only. Out of this consideration money he was to<\/p>\n
pay 25% by way of a Bank Draft within 21 days of the date of<\/p>\n
issue of the order for confirmation of sale in his favour and<\/p>\n
balance amount to Rs. 2.95 lakhs was converted into loan<\/p>\n
repayable in a period of five years in twenty equal quarterly<\/p>\n
installments and the first installment becoming due on 31 st<\/p>\n
January, 1997. The installment worked out for him was Rs.<\/p>\n
11067.58 Paise. The interest component was 20% per annum,<\/p>\n
rest of the other conditions are not required to be dealt with in<\/p>\n
detail.\n<\/p>\n
          When the petitioner learnt about the terms and<\/p>\n
conditions which had been offered to the purchaser the private<\/p>\n
respondents no. 3, he approached the corporation for<\/p>\n
reconsideration. He demanded a kind of parity or fairness in the<\/p>\n
decision making process, more so, since the respondents are<\/p>\n
not only statutory body but a public body and certain amount of<\/p>\n
responsibility is thrust upon them in decision making, specially<\/p>\n
in public domain. Respondents however adopted the attitude of<\/p>\n
take it or leave it. The petitioner did not succeed in getting any<\/p>\n
concession to the offer made to him. He even contends that<\/p>\n
probably it was purposefully done to shut him out of the scene,<\/p>\n
so that private respondents Sanjay Kumar Chopra could have<\/p>\n
posses the unit at his own leisure and time without making any<\/p>\n
major financial outlay.\n<\/p>\n
                      -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
         Vide order dated 23.09.1999, the sale of the Unit was<\/p>\n
confirmed in favour of private respondents the petitioner is<\/p>\n
aggrieved by this communication and decision and therefore,<\/p>\n
the writ application came to be filed. At the time of admission,<\/p>\n
the court decided to protect the interest of the petitioner by<\/p>\n
directing that till further orders the Unit in question would not be<\/p>\n
sold and the assets and liabilities of the Unit was protected. In<\/p>\n
other words, by virtue of the order dated 14.10.1999, a kind of<\/p>\n
status quo came to be maintained and Annexure – 1 to that<\/p>\n
extent was not given effect to.\n<\/p>\n
         Notice had been issued to the private respondent but<\/p>\n
he has chosen not to appear or assist the court. The counsel for<\/p>\n
the respondent’s corporation also informs the court that he has<\/p>\n
not been in touch with the office of the corporation on the matter<\/p>\n
for a long long time which could be an indication of the fact that<\/p>\n
he might have lost interest in the matter, since the writ<\/p>\n
application is almost 10 years old when it was initially filed.<\/p>\n
         Counsel for the corporation is present and has<\/p>\n
submitted in favour of the decision for auction sale of the Unit.<\/p>\n
His submission is that the corporation has acted bonafidely and<\/p>\n
only to protect its commercial or financial interest. The offer<\/p>\n
made to the private respondent was in terms of his commitment<\/p>\n
to the purchase and to assure that a buyer does emerge which<\/p>\n
will facilitate recovery of some amount of money which was<\/p>\n
loaned out to the original promoter.\n<\/p>\n
                     -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
         No doubt the object for such decision is laudable but<\/p>\n
the test of the pudding is in eating because there is nothing to<\/p>\n
show from records that the respondent corporation at any point<\/p>\n
of time really wanted to consider the offer of the petitioner with<\/p>\n
equal magnanimity if not equality. If the corporation would have<\/p>\n
been a little less tight fisted may be, they could have struck a<\/p>\n
bargain with the petitioner whose sole interest in saving the Unit<\/p>\n
was his emotion and feeling for a son who had gone missing<\/p>\n
and had not been heard in all these years.\n<\/p>\n
         A dispassionate reading of Annexure – 4 with<\/p>\n
Annexure -2 of the writ highlights the issue and reaffirms the<\/p>\n
feeling of discrimination which the petitioner is making a<\/p>\n
grievance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no quarrel<\/p>\n
with the power which the corporation has under section 29, but<\/p>\n
he only wants a fair treatment in matter of decision making<\/p>\n
process. Even today he is willing to meet the obligation of the<\/p>\n
original promoter provided the finance corporation uses the<\/p>\n
same yardstick and may be on similar laid down consideration<\/p>\n
as purchaser in matters of repayment of the outstanding dues<\/p>\n
against the Unit.\n<\/p>\n
         The present petitioner is the father of the original<\/p>\n
promoter, he has no responsibility or liability to the Corporation.<\/p>\n
Merely because he happens to be the father of the original<\/p>\n
promoter, it does not mean that the respondents corporation<\/p>\n
has to be harsh in its decision making process.
\n                                           -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
                            The court does come to a considered opinion that the<\/p>\n
                   matter requires reconsideration at the level of the corporation<\/p>\n
                   with an observation that the terms and conditions which had<\/p>\n
                   been offered to the purchaser, who is anyway not interested in<\/p>\n
                   pursuing the matter would be kept in mind so that the petitioner<\/p>\n
                   wish to wash away the stigma or the liability which had been<\/p>\n
                   created by his son may be fulfilled.\n<\/p>\n
                            The writ application is allowed. Annexure – 1 is<\/p>\n
                   quashed with a direction that an early decision be taken to<\/p>\n
                   resolve the dispute.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\nPatna High Court\nThe 25th Day of\nNovember, 2008                        (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)\nNAFR\/AFR,\nRajeev\/\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008 Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10221 OF 1999 SHYAM NARAIN SINHA, son of Late Ram Barai Lal, resident of Mohalla Katirabag, Ara, P.S. Ara Nawadah District – Bhojpur ————(Petitioner) Versus 1. Managing Director, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Frazer […]<\/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":[8,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87788","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 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\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-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=\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-02T11:18:49+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\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-02T11:18:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1279,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-02T11:18:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 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":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 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\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-02T11:18:49+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\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-02T11:18:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008"},"wordCount":1279,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008","name":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-02T11:18:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shyam-narain-sinha-vs-managing-directorbihar-state-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shyam Narain Sinha vs Managing Director,Bihar State on 25 November, 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\/87788","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=87788"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87788\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87788"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87788"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87788"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}