{"id":11031,"date":"2008-06-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008"},"modified":"2017-07-08T00:24:43","modified_gmt":"2017-07-07T18:54:43","slug":"jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court<\/div>\n
Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Jayanandan Singh<\/div>\n
                          Letters Patent Appeal No.790 OF 2000\n                                              -------\n<\/pre>\n
             Against Judgment and order dated 23rd March, 2000 passed
\n             by a learned single of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8065 of
\n             1995.\n<\/p>\n
                                              ——-\n<\/p>\n
             JAGANNATH PRASAD @ JAGANNATH LAL————–Appellant
\n                                      Versus
\n            THE UNDER SECRETARY, GOVT. OF INDIA———–Respondents\n<\/p>\n
                                     ——-\n<\/p>\n
            For the appellant :M\/S N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate and
\n                                    Pramod Manbansh, Advocate.\n<\/p>\n
            For the respondent:Mr. S.N. Pathak, SCCG.<\/p>\n
                                                    P R E S E N T<\/p>\n
                                 THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BARIN GHOSH
\n                                 THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH<\/p>\n
Barin Ghosh
\n     &
\nJayanandan Sinh,JJ:              During       the   pendency     of    the   appeal,    the<\/p>\n
                      appellant has died. An application has been filed by<\/p>\n
                      the widow of the appellant for recording the death of<\/p>\n
                      the appellant and for substituting the appellant by<\/p>\n
                      her. The application being not opposed, the same is<\/p>\n
                      allowed.\n<\/p>\n
                                     2.   We have heard learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
                      parties. The original appellant applied for grant of<\/p>\n
                      freedom fighters samman pension on 23rd July, 1981.<\/p>\n
                      The said application was rejected by an order dated<\/p>\n
                      25th June, 1986. On 9th September, 1992 the original<\/p>\n
                      appellant filed a writ petition, being C.W.J.C. No.<\/p>\n
                      9044 of 1992, challenging the said order of rejection<\/p>\n
                      dated   25th    June,   1986.     The   said    writ   petition   was
\n                              -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
allowed by an order dated 22nd October, 1992 whereby<\/p>\n
and under the order rejecting the application of the<\/p>\n
original      appellant       for       grant    of        such    pension       was<\/p>\n
quashed and Central Government was directed to pass a<\/p>\n
fresh order. In terms thereof the Central Government<\/p>\n
passed    a    fresh       order    dated      14th    January,         1994     and<\/p>\n
thereby       accorded       such       pension        to         the     original<\/p>\n
appellant with effect from 15th November, 1993.<\/p>\n
               3.           In a writ petition registered as<\/p>\n
C.W.J.C.      No.    8065     of    1995     the      original          appellant<\/p>\n
contended that he was entitle to such pension from 1st<\/p>\n
of August, 1980, when the revised freedom fighters<\/p>\n
samman pension became effective, and if not, at least<\/p>\n
from 23rd July, 1981 i.e. the date when he had applied<\/p>\n
for such pension.\n<\/p>\n
               4.          This writ petition was contested by<\/p>\n
the    Union    of     India.      In    the     supplementary             counter<\/p>\n
affidavit filed, the Union of India contended that<\/p>\n
inasmuch       as    there      was      doubt        as     to     six     months<\/p>\n
sufferance of the original appellant, such pension was<\/p>\n
accorded in his favour giving benefit of doubt to him.<\/p>\n
In order to establish that there was reason to express<\/p>\n
such     doubt,      the    Union       of   India         in     the     form    of<\/p>\n
Annexure-       B     to     the      said      supplementary              counter<\/p>\n
affidavit annexed the G.R. register in relation to
\n                               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
Bariarpur P.S. Case No. 16.\n<\/p>\n
                5.        The learned single judge who dealt<\/p>\n
with the writ petition noted that the said case was<\/p>\n
instituted in respect of an offence which took place<\/p>\n
on 16th    August, 1942 against one Ram Singh and 47<\/p>\n
others.    In        connection      with    the     said    case     on   29th<\/p>\n
September, 1942 a charge sheet dated 28th September,<\/p>\n
1942 was submitted against the said Ram Singh and 10<\/p>\n
other accused persons. The learned single judge noted<\/p>\n
that the name of the original appellant featured as<\/p>\n
one of the accused persons and it was mentioned that<\/p>\n
the original appellant was absconding. In the trial,<\/p>\n
learned    judge       noted,       all   the    accused         persons   were<\/p>\n
finally acquitted on 17th December, 1942. The purpose<\/p>\n
of   annexing           the     G.R.      register          to     the     said<\/p>\n
supplementary counter affidavit was to establish that<\/p>\n
there was reason to doubt as to whether the appellant<\/p>\n
remained an absconder for a period of six months in<\/p>\n
asmuch as the trial pertaining to the incident, which<\/p>\n
occurred on 16th August, 1942, was concluded by an<\/p>\n
order of acquittal on 17th December, 1942. However,<\/p>\n
the learned Judge found from the same register that<\/p>\n
there     was    an     order       signed      by   the    Sub-Divisional<\/p>\n
Officer without a date, which records existence of a<\/p>\n
note of the Deputy Superintendent of Police dated 10th
\n                           -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
March, 1944. The purpose of the said order was to<\/p>\n
recall the warrant of arrest and processes against the<\/p>\n
absconders and to direct the Sub Inspector to release<\/p>\n
their attached properties. Although this order of the<\/p>\n
Sub-Divisional       Officer     is    not    dated    but    the    order<\/p>\n
itself would suggest that the said order must have<\/p>\n
been written after 10th March, 1944 i.e. after the<\/p>\n
note of the Deputy Superintendent of Police dated 10th<\/p>\n
March, 1944 was brought to the notice of the Sub-<\/p>\n
Divisional Officer.\n<\/p>\n
              6.          In    such   view    of     the    matter    the<\/p>\n
learned judge while dealing with the writ petition<\/p>\n
came to a finding that there was no reason to doubt<\/p>\n
that the original appellant remained an absconder for<\/p>\n
a period in excess of six months in asmuch as from the<\/p>\n
records it appears that the warrant of arrest against<\/p>\n
him was recalled only after 10th March, 1944 although<\/p>\n
he was acquitted on 17th December, 1942.<\/p>\n
              7.          Furthermore        the acquittal      on     17th<\/p>\n
December, 1942 was of all those persons, who had been<\/p>\n
tried   and    not   of   the    absconders.        The     evidence    on<\/p>\n
record therefore clearly suggested that a warrant of<\/p>\n
arrest was issued against the original appellant in<\/p>\n
relation to an incident which occurred on 16th August,<\/p>\n
1942 and the same was recalled only on or after 10th
\n                               -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
March,    1944        and    during     that       period     the     original<\/p>\n
appellant had been treated to be an absconder. On the<\/p>\n
basis    of    such       documentary      evidence       a      decision   was<\/p>\n
ultimately taken by the Central Government to award<\/p>\n
pension       to    the     original       appellant,         which      clearly<\/p>\n
demonstrates sufferance by the original appellant for<\/p>\n
a period in excess of six months and accordingly the<\/p>\n
learned judge in no uncertain terms has held that it<\/p>\n
is not a case of grant of benefit of doubt to accord<\/p>\n
such pension.\n<\/p>\n
               8.           The learned judge while dealing with<\/p>\n
the writ petition noted the judgment of the Hon’ble<\/p>\n
Supreme       Court    rendered       in     the   case     of    Mukund    Lal<\/p>\n
Bhandari versus Union of India, reported in AIR 1993<\/p>\n
SC 2127, and applying the ratio contained therein, has<\/p>\n
held that the original appellant was not entitled to<\/p>\n
pension from a date anterior to the date of the making<\/p>\n
of application for grant of pension.\n<\/p>\n
               9.           The learned judge also took note of<\/p>\n
the judgment of the Hon,ble Supreme Court rendered by<\/p>\n
three Hon’ble Judges in the case of Union of India<\/p>\n
versus    M.R.      Chelliah        Thevar    decided       on    30th   April,<\/p>\n
1996 in C.A. No. 7762 of 1996, where Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court while reconciling the conflict in the decisions<\/p>\n
of the Supreme Court rendered by two Hon’ble Judges
\n                            -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
held that if it is a clear case, then freedom fighter<\/p>\n
samman     pension    is         payable     from     the        date     of<\/p>\n
application, but if pension is granted on the basis of<\/p>\n
benefit of doubt the same is payable from the date of<\/p>\n
the order. Having considered such binding view of the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble    Supreme    Court,       there     was    no     question       of<\/p>\n
holding that the pension was payable from the date of<\/p>\n
the order granting the same. It was obligatory on the<\/p>\n
part of the learned single judge to direct grant of<\/p>\n
pension to the original appellant from the date of the<\/p>\n
application made by the original appellant for grant<\/p>\n
of    pension,   but that        having    been    not    granted,       the<\/p>\n
original appellant preferred the present appeal.<\/p>\n
            10.           The learned judge by the judgment<\/p>\n
and order under appeal held in clear terms that there<\/p>\n
was no question of grant of benefit of doubt to the<\/p>\n
original    appellant       as     regards    his        right    to     get<\/p>\n
pension, but held that since the original appellant<\/p>\n
challenged the order rejecting his application only on<\/p>\n
9th September, 1992 by filing the first writ petition,<\/p>\n
the    pension    should     be    granted     from       the    date     of<\/p>\n
presentation of the said writ petition.<\/p>\n
            11.           The learned counsel appearing in<\/p>\n
support of the appeal submitted that despite six years<\/p>\n
delay,     the    first     writ      petition       was        not     only
\n                            -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
entertained,        but   the same was allowed and as such<\/p>\n
there can be no effect of such delay. The delay in<\/p>\n
filing    the    said      writ    petition,      if    any,    it   was<\/p>\n
submitted, was not taken note of by the court. He next<\/p>\n
contented that the said writ petition was disposed of<\/p>\n
on 22nd October, 1992 by which the order rejecting the<\/p>\n
application dated 23rd July, 1981 was quashed, with a<\/p>\n
direction upon the Central Government to pass a fresh<\/p>\n
order. The Central Government, it was submitted, was<\/p>\n
directed to pass a fresh order on the application of<\/p>\n
the original appellant and ultimately the order dated<\/p>\n
14th    January,      1994       was    passed     by    the    Central<\/p>\n
Government on the said application of the original<\/p>\n
appellant dated 23rd July, 1981. The Counsel submitted<\/p>\n
that in such circumstances, in view of the findings<\/p>\n
recorded by the learned Single Judge, it was not just<\/p>\n
to direct payment of pension from 19th September, 1992<\/p>\n
and not from the date of the application i.e. 23rd<\/p>\n
July, 1981.\n<\/p>\n
              12.         The learned counsel for the Central<\/p>\n
Government      submitted        that   from     the    tenor   of   the<\/p>\n
pleadings of the parties filed in the writ petition it<\/p>\n
would    be     evidenced        that   the      Central    Government<\/p>\n
ultimately accorded pension to the original appellant<\/p>\n
by giving him a benefit of doubt on the basis of the
\n                         -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
records contained in the said G.R. register. It was<\/p>\n
submitted that in such view of the matter there would<\/p>\n
be no scope of getting pension from any date earlier<\/p>\n
than the date from which the pension had been accorded<\/p>\n
by   the   Central   Government.   The   said   submission   is<\/p>\n
fallacious in asmuch as not only there is a direct<\/p>\n
pronouncement in the judgment and order under appeal<\/p>\n
that the facts and circumstances of the case as borne<\/p>\n
out from the records do not suggest any scope of grant<\/p>\n
of benefit of doubt to the original appellant, but the<\/p>\n
fact   remains that by the judgment and order under<\/p>\n
appeal the date of grant of pension has been made<\/p>\n
effective from 9th September, 1992, i.e. much prior to<\/p>\n
the date of the order granting pension,but the Central<\/p>\n
Government has not preferred any appeal or a cross<\/p>\n
objection against the judgment and order under appeal.<\/p>\n
            13.       In the circumstances, we accept the<\/p>\n
submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
and find no reason for not granting pension from the<\/p>\n
date of the application for pension but from the date<\/p>\n
of filing of the writ petition by which the order<\/p>\n
rejecting    the     prayer   as   was   made   in   the   said<\/p>\n
application was challenged.\n<\/p>\n
            15.        The appeal is accordingly allowed.<\/p>\n
As a result the judgment and order under appeal is
\n                                -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
modified     by    directing         payment     of     freedom   fighter<\/p>\n
samman    pension         to   the   original     appellant       for   the<\/p>\n
period    from     23rd    July,     1991   to   14th      November,    1993<\/p>\n
within a period of six months from today.<\/p>\n
                                      ( Barin Ghosh, J.)<\/p>\n
                                      ( Jayanandan Singh, J.)<\/p>\n
Patna High Court
\nDated 26th June, 2008
\nArvind\/ N.A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008 Author: Jayanandan Singh Letters Patent Appeal No.790 OF 2000 ——- Against Judgment and order dated 23rd March, 2000 passed by a learned single of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8065 of 1995. ——- JAGANNATH PRASAD @ JAGANNATH LAL————–Appellant Versus […]<\/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-11031","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 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\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-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=\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-07T18:54:43+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-07T18:54:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1767,\"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\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-07T18:54:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 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":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 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\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-07T18:54:43+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-07T18:54:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008"},"wordCount":1767,"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\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008","name":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-07T18:54:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jagannath-prasad-lal-vs-the-under-secretarygovt-of-in-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jagannath Prasad @ Lal vs The Under Secretary,Govt.Of In on 26 June, 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\/11031","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=11031"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11031\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11031"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11031"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11031"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}