{"id":9179,"date":"2009-07-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009"},"modified":"2015-10-11T05:21:46","modified_gmt":"2015-10-10T23:51:46","slug":"nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n             W.P. (C) No. 2994 of 2008\nNilesh Kumar Pandey                  ...      Petitioner\n                    Versus\nThe State of Jharkhand &amp; others ...           Respondents\n             .............\nCORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL\n             .............\n For the Petitioner       Mr. Vikash Kishore Prasad\n For the Respondents      J.C. to S.C (L &amp; C)\n             .............\n       4\/ Dated: 17th of July, 2009\n\n1.    The present writ petition has been preferred mainly for\nthe reason that Permission Case No. 01\/2006-07 has been\ninstituted by the daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas, who was\nthe lessee of the suit property for 30 years. Upon his death,\nsons of Mukunda Lal Biswas namely Ranjit Kumar Biswas and\nBishwanath Biswas were continued to possess the lease hold\nproperty for remaining period of the lease. Upon expiry of the\nsaid lease period of 30 years, which was given to Mukunda Lal\nBiswas, both the sons had applied for renewal of the lease. The\nGovernment being a lessor of the property renewed the lease for\n30 years in favour of Ranjit Kumar Biswas and Bishwanath\nBiswas. Three daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas at that time\nhad given their no objection. Thus, it is alleged by counsel for\nthe petitioner that the three daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas\nrelinquished their rights in favour of their two brothers. This is\nhow the lease was renewed by the Government in favour of\nRanjit Kumar Biswas and Bishwanath Biswas for 30 years. It is\nalleged by counsel for the petitioner that by the passage of time,\nRanjit Kumar Biswas expired and the lease hold property was\ncontinued in possession of Bishwanath Biswas alone, who\nexecuted the Will in favour of the present petitioner dated 29th\nAugust, 2002 and, thereafter, Bishwanath Biswas expired on\n6th June, 2005 and, therefore, it is alleged by learned counsel\nfor the petitioner that now the petitioner must be the lessee of\nlease hold property for the remaining period of renewed lease\nand for that the petitioner has applied for getting probate before\nthe concerned Trial Court and the probate case bearing Probate\nCase No. 8\/2007 is pending before learned District Judge,\nPalamau.\n2.    It is further alleged by learned counsel for the petitioner\nthat at such a belated stage, three daughters of Mukunda Lal\nBiswas preferred an application bearing Permission Case No.\n                             2\n\n\n01\/2006-07<\/pre>\n<p>, seeking permission to sell the property and,<br \/>\ntherefore, the petitioner has applied for hearing before the<br \/>\nDeputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj prior to grant of<br \/>\nsuch a permission to the three daughters of Mukunda Lal<br \/>\nBiswas and it is apprehended by the petitioner that if the<br \/>\nDeputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj (respondent no.\n<\/p>\n<p>2) grants permission for selling of the property, it will cause an<br \/>\nirreparable loss to the petitioner because the Will has been<br \/>\nexecuted by Bishwanath Biswas (one of the lease holder of the<br \/>\nrenewed lease), in favour of the petitioner vide Will dated 29th<br \/>\nAugust, 2002. Thus, till the probate case is decided, which is<br \/>\nfiled by the petitioner, an application preferred by the three<br \/>\ndaughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas being Permission Case No.<br \/>\n01\/2006-07 may not be decided or if the Deputy Commissioner,<br \/>\nPalamau at Daltonganj is deciding the matter, the petitioner<br \/>\nmust be given an opportunity of being heard or if the<br \/>\napplication is going to be dismissed, then petitioner has no<br \/>\nmuch objection. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner that in fact the daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas can<br \/>\nnot sell the property because owner of the property is the<br \/>\nGovernment. The Government is the lessor and it is submitted<br \/>\nby learned counsel for the petitioner that the tallest claim of the<br \/>\ndaughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas that they can be lessee for<br \/>\nthe remaining period, but, the lease of Mukunda Lal Biswas has<br \/>\nalready been expired and there is no renewal of the lease in<br \/>\nfavour of these three daughters, therefore, they can not apply<br \/>\nfor sale of the property or sale of their lease hold rights for the<br \/>\nremaining period of lease because no lease was ever given to<br \/>\nthese three daughters by the Government and, therefore, this<br \/>\npetition may be allowed by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.    I   have   heard    learned     counsel    appearing    for   the<br \/>\nrespondents,     who     has    vehemently      submitted    that   the<br \/>\nGovernment is the owner of the property in question, the<br \/>\nGovernment is the lessor of the property in question, right of<br \/>\nselling of property is vested in the Government and it never<br \/>\nvests in the lessee and, therefore, there is no question of<br \/>\nallowing any application preferred by the three daughters of<br \/>\nMukunda Lal Biswas whatsoever arises. The prayer for selling<br \/>\nof the property can not be made by any lessee, much less by the<br \/>\nlegal heir of the lessee.       It is also vehemently submitted by<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondents that initially the lease was<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                             3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>given to Mukunda Lal Biswas.         The lease has expired and<br \/>\nMukunda Lal Biswas has also expired. Two sons of Mukunda<br \/>\nLal Biswas have applied for renewal of the lease and it was<br \/>\nrenewed in favour of two sons of Mukunda Lal Biswas. Thus,<br \/>\nthe lease was never given to the three daughters of Mukunda<br \/>\nLal Biswas and, therefore, there is no question of allowing the<br \/>\nselling of the property nor the three daughters have any right to<br \/>\nsell the lease hold property because they were never lessee of<br \/>\nproperty in question and, therefore, there is no need to hear the<br \/>\npetitioner.    It is also submitted by learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner that the petitioner has also no locus standi in<br \/>\nPermission Case No. 01\/2006-07.          It is also submitted by<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondents that the name of the<br \/>\npetitioner has not mutated in the revenue records and,<br \/>\ntherefore also, there is no locus standi with the petitioner in the<br \/>\nPermission Case No. 01\/2006-07.          It is also submitted by<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner&#8217;s right<br \/>\nunder the Will is in belligerent stage. No right of the petitioner<br \/>\nhas been crystallized under the Will and, therefore also, the<br \/>\npetitioner has no locus standi in Permission Case No. 01\/2006-<br \/>\n07 and, therefore, this petition may be dismissed by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.       Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and<br \/>\nlooking to facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason<br \/>\nto entertain this petition mainly for the following facts and<br \/>\nreasons:-\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)      The State Government is an owner of the property in<br \/>\nquestion, as well as the lessor of the property.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)     The State Government has initially given the lease for 30<br \/>\nyears to one Shri Mukunda Lal Biswas. Lease has expired and<br \/>\nthe lessee has also expired.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)    It appears that Mukunda Lal Biswas was having two sons<br \/>\nand three daughters. Two sons applied for renewal of the lease.<br \/>\nIt is alleged by learned counsel for the petitioner that the three<br \/>\ndaughters have given no objection, to their brothers namely<br \/>\nRanjit Kumar Biswas and Bishwanath Biswas for renewal of the<br \/>\nlease.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)     It appears from the facts of the case that the Government<br \/>\nhas renewed the lease for further period of 30 years in favour of<br \/>\ntwo sons of Mukunda Lal Biswas namely Ranjit Kumar Biswas<br \/>\nand Bishwanath Biswas. Lease was never renewed in favour of<br \/>\nthree daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        (v)     It also appears that thereafter, Ranjit Kumar Biswas has<br \/>\n        expired and left out lessee, Bishwanath Biswas executed a Will<br \/>\n        dated 29th August, 2002 and he thereafter expired on 6th June,<br \/>\n        2005.    The petitioner claims to be the beneficiary of the said<br \/>\n        Will and he wants to step into the shoes of lessee for the<br \/>\n        remaining period of the lease and, therefore, he has applied for<br \/>\n        probate bearing Probate Case No. 8\/2007, which is pending<br \/>\n        before learned District Judge, Palamau.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (vi)    It appears that meanwhile three daughters of Mukunda<br \/>\n        Lal Biswas had preferred an application bearing Permission<br \/>\n        Case    No.    01\/2006-07        before   the   Deputy      Commissioner,<br \/>\n        Palamau at Daltonganj for getting permission for selling away<br \/>\n        the property.       It appears that no lease was renewed in their<br \/>\n        favour and even otherwise also legal heir of the lessee can not<br \/>\n        apply for selling of the property. As there was no lease in favour<br \/>\n        of the three daughters of Mukunda Lal Biswas, there is also no<br \/>\n        question whatsoever arise of the sale of lease hold rights by<br \/>\n        them.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (vii)   Looking to the pendency of Probate Case No. 8\/2007<br \/>\n        before learned District Judge, Palamau, preferred by the<br \/>\n        present petitioner on the basis of the Will dated 29th August,<br \/>\n        2002, there is no right vested in the petitioner to be heard in<br \/>\n        the Permission Case No. 01\/2006-07 nor the name of the<br \/>\n        petitioner has been entered into the revenue records. In this set<br \/>\n        of circumstances, the petitioner has no locus standi in<br \/>\n        Permission Case No. 01\/2006-07.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.      As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and reasons,<br \/>\n        there is no substance in this petition and, hence, the same is<br \/>\n        hereby dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.      At    the   same   time,     I    hereby   direct    the   Deputy<br \/>\n        Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj (respondent no. 2) to<br \/>\n        dispose of the Permission Case No. 01\/2006-07 as expeditiously<br \/>\n        as possible, practicable, preferably and in accordance with law<br \/>\n        and keeping in mind the rights of lessee and also keeping in<br \/>\n        mind, who are the lessees.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.      The petition is, hereby, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                 (D.N. Patel, J.)<\/p>\n<p>Ajay\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 2994 of 2008 Nilesh Kumar Pandey &#8230; Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand &amp; others &#8230; Respondents &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. For the Petitioner Mr. [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9179","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - 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\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-10T23:51:46+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-10T23:51:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1174,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-10T23:51:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 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":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - 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\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-10T23:51:46+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-10T23:51:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009"},"wordCount":1174,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009","name":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-10T23:51:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nilesh-kumar-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-17-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nilesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 17 July, 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\/9179","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=9179"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9179\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9179"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9179"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9179"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}