{"id":119305,"date":"1975-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1975-10-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2"},"modified":"2015-09-16T08:45:11","modified_gmt":"2015-09-16T03:15:11","slug":"joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","title":{"rendered":"Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 2275, \t\t  1976 SCR  (2)\t 78<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Gupta<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Gupta, A.C.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nJOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA &amp; ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nKHILLU RAM AND ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT06\/10\/1975\n\nBENCH:\nGUPTA, A.C.\nBENCH:\nGUPTA, A.C.\nKRISHNAIYER, V.R.\nFAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA\n\nCITATION:\n 1975 AIR 2275\t\t  1976 SCR  (2)\t 78\n 1976 SCC  (1)\t88\n\n\nACT:\n     Displaced\tpersons\t (Compensation\tand  Rehabilitation)\nRules, 1955,  r. 30-  Effects of  its  deletion\t on  pending\nproceedings-Retrospective effect.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     Rule 30  of the  Displaced\t Persons  (Compensation\t and\nRehabilitation) Rules,\t1955, prescribes that where property\nis in  the occupation  of more persons than one, it shall be\noffered to  the\t person\t whose\tgross  compensation  is\t the\nhighest.\n     A particular  property was\t allotted under this rule to\nthe first  respondent. A  revision  petition  by  the  rival\nclaimant, was  dismissed ill  September, 1963. But on August\n13, 1963,  the rule  had been  abrogated. The  effect of the\ndeletion was  that a property in the occupation of more than\none person was to be put to sale. In an application under s.\n33   of\t   the\t Displaced    Persons\t(Compensation\t and\nRehabilitation)\t Act,  1954,  by  the  rival  claimant,\t the\nappellant held that the case should be governed by the rules\nas amended,  that is,  excluding r.  30, and  set aside\t the\norder allotting the premises to the first respondent. A writ\npetition filed by the first respondent in the High Court was\nallowed.\nIn appeal  to this  court, the\tappellant contended that the\nrule was one of procedure and its deletion affected only the\nmode of\t proceeding by\twhich the  rival  claim\t was  to  be\ndecided.\n     Dismissing the appeal,\n^\n     HELD: The\trights of  the two  rival claimants  must be\ngoverned by  r. 30 which was in force when the dispute arose\nand was decided by the authorities under the Act. [80 G-H].\n     (a) Rule 30 deals, not with form of procedure, but with\nthe substantive\t right conferred  by the  Act  on  displaced\npersons. The  Act provides  for the  payment of compensation\nand rehabilitation  grants to  displaced persons and matters\nconnected therewith.  Rule 30  is in  Chapter V of the Rules\nwhich deals  with payment  of compensation  by\ttransfer  of\nacquired evacuee  properties. Assuming that the rule is only\na mode\tor manner  of payment  of compensation, the form and\nmanner in  which compensation  is payable  is also a part of\nthe right to get compensation. The rule is not an instrument\nof machinery  for asserting a right conferred by the A t. it\ndoes not  regulate the\tprocedure for settlement of disputes\nconcerning that\t right. Therefore,  the deletion of the rule\nin 1963 cannot affect pending actions, [80 D-G].\n     (b) Neither  by express  words nor\t by implication\t the\namendment of  the rules in 1963 deleting r. 30 has been made\nretrospective in operation. [81 A-B].\n     Pt. Dev  Raj v.  Union of India &amp; ors., A.I.R. 1974 Pun\n65, approved.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No. 862 of<br \/>\n1968.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Appeal by\tspecial leave  from the\t Judgment and  order<br \/>\ndated the  6th December,  1964 of  the Punjab &amp; Haryana High<br \/>\nCourt in Civil Writ No.587 of 1964.\n<\/p>\n<p>     G. L. Sanghi and Girish Chandra for the Appellants.<br \/>\n     S. N. Anand for the Respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">79<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     The  Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     GUPTA, J.\tThis appeal by special leave arises out of a<br \/>\nproceeding under  the Displaced\t Persons  (Compensation\t and<br \/>\nRehabilitation) Act,  1954 (hereinafter\t referred to  as the<br \/>\nAct). The  only question  for determination in the appeal is<br \/>\nwhether the  deletion of  rule 30  of the  Displaced Persons<br \/>\n(Compensation and  Rehabilitation) Rules,  1955 (hereinafter<br \/>\nreferred to as the Rules) with effect from August . 13, 1963<br \/>\nmade any  difference to\t the rights of the parties concerned<br \/>\nin this case. The question arises on the following facts.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Shop No.  2 in  Tripri township  in Patiala  which is a<br \/>\ngovernment built  property was allotted in 1950 to the first<br \/>\nrespondent Khillu  Ram jointly\twith one  Tara Chand and his<br \/>\nson by\tthe Custodian of Evacuee Property. In 1951 both Tara<br \/>\nChand and  his son  Left Tripri\t to settle elsewhere and the<br \/>\nsecond respondent  Teju Mal  applied for  allotment of their<br \/>\nshare in  the shop  to him.  By his order dated November 11,<br \/>\n1959 the  Managing officer,  Tripri and\t Rajpura, held\tthat<br \/>\nTeju Mal  and Khillu  Ram were\tin possession of the shop as<br \/>\nallottees  respectively\t of  2\/3  and  1\/3  shares  therein.<br \/>\nAggrieved by  the order\t of the\t Managing officer, the first<br \/>\nrespondent Khillu  Ram preferred an appeal to the Settlement<br \/>\nofficer, Jullundur, who by his order dated February 12, 1962<br \/>\nset aside the order of the Managing officer and remanded the<br \/>\ncase for  a fresh  decision under rule 30 of the Rules. Rule<br \/>\n30 is in these terms:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8221;  Payment   of  compensation\t where\tan  acquired<br \/>\n     evacuee property  which is\t an allotable property is in<br \/>\n     occupation of  more than  one person.  If more  persons<br \/>\n     than one  holding verified\t claims are in occupation of<br \/>\n     any acquired  evacuee property  which is  an  allotable<br \/>\n     property, the  property shall  be offered to the person<br \/>\n     whose gross  compensation is  the biggest and the other<br \/>\n     persons may  be allotted  such other  acquired  evacuee<br \/>\n     property which is allotable as may be available :&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This rule  has a proviso and an explanation none of which is<br \/>\nrelevant for  the present purpose. After remand the case was<br \/>\ntransferred to\tthe Assistant  Settlement officer  who found<br \/>\nthat the  gross compensation payable to the first respondent<br \/>\nwas higher  than that of the rival claimant, Teju Mal and in<br \/>\nterms of  rule 30  allotted the\t entire shop  to  the  first<br \/>\nrespondent by  his order dated November 27, 1962. A revision<br \/>\npetition against  this order  made by Teju Mal was dismissed<br \/>\nby the Deputy Chief Settlement Officer on September 5, 1963.<br \/>\nIn the\tmeantime,  as  stated  already,\t rule  30  had\tbeen<br \/>\nabrogated with\teffect from  August 13,\t 1963. Teju Mal then<br \/>\nmoved the  Central Government under sec. 33 of the Act. Teju<br \/>\nMal&#8217;s application  under sec.  33 was  heard on February 25,<br \/>\n1964. The  effect of  deletion\tof  rule  30  was  that\t the<br \/>\nproperties which  were in  the occupation  of more  than one<br \/>\nperson were  to be  put to  sale. The Joint Secretary to the<br \/>\nGovernment of  India who heard the application under sec. 33<br \/>\nheld that  the case  should be\tgoverned  by  the  Rules  as<br \/>\namended in  1963 excluding  rule 30,  and accordingly by his<br \/>\norder dated February<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">80<\/span><br \/>\n26, 1964  he set  aside the  order allotting the shop to the<br \/>\nfirst respondent  Khillu Ram  and directed  the property  in<br \/>\nquestion to  be put  to sale.  The first  respondent filed a<br \/>\nwrit petition  in the  Punjab High  Court for  quashing\t the<br \/>\norder passed  under sec. 33. The Punjab High Court held that<br \/>\nthe subsequent\tdeletion of  rule  30  did  not\t affect\t the<br \/>\nexisting rights\t of the\t first respondent  and\tquashed\t the<br \/>\norder of  the Central  Government made\tunder sec.  33.\t The<br \/>\ncorrectness of\tthis `\torder is  challenged in\t the  appeal<br \/>\nbefore us which has been preferred by the Union of India and<br \/>\nseveral other  authorities concerned with the administration<br \/>\nof the\tDisplaced Persons  (Compensation and Rehabilitation)<br \/>\nAct, 1954.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The only  submission made\tby Mr.\tSanghi appearing for<br \/>\nthe appellants\tis that\t rule 30 was a rule of procedure and<br \/>\nits deletion in 1963 affected only the mode of proceeding by<br \/>\nwhich the  rival claims of Khillu Ram and Teju Mal was to be<br \/>\ndecided. It was argued that &#8211; amendment of the Rules in 1963<br \/>\ndeleting rule  30 being procedural in character would affect<br \/>\nthe proceeding between the two respondents then pending, and<br \/>\ntheir rights,  it was submitted, should therefore be decided<br \/>\non the footing as if Rule 30 had never been in force. We are<br \/>\nunable to  accept this\tsubmission. The Act provides for the<br \/>\npayment\t of   compensation  and\t  rehabilitation  grants  to<br \/>\ndisplaced persons and matters connected therewith. Under the<br \/>\nAct a  displaced person\t has a\tright to get compensation in<br \/>\nthe form  and manner  prescribed by  the Act  and the  Rules<br \/>\nframed thereunder.  Rule 30  is in  Chapter V  of the  Rules<br \/>\nwhich deals  with payment  of compensation  by\ttransfer  of<br \/>\nacquired Evacuee  Properties. Though the shop in question is<br \/>\na government  built property  and not  an  acquired  evacuee<br \/>\nproperty, rule\t43 in Chapter VI of the Rules which provides<br \/>\nfor payment  of compensation by transfer of government built<br \/>\nproperty says that the &#8220;pro visions of rules 25 to 34 shall,<br \/>\nso far\tas may\tbe, apply  to the transfer of any Government<br \/>\nbuilt property\tor Government plot under this Chapter&#8221;. Rule<br \/>\n30 prescribes  that where  the property is in the occupation<br \/>\nof more\t persons than one, it shall be offered to the person<br \/>\nwhose gross  compensation is  the highest.  Clearly rule  30<br \/>\ndeals not  with the form of procedure but with a substantive<br \/>\nright conferred\t by the Act on displaced persons. Mr. Sanghi<br \/>\ndescribed this\trule as\t only a mode or manner of payment of<br \/>\ncompensation. This  may be  so, but  the form  and manner in<br \/>\nwhich compensation  is payable\tis also part of the right to<br \/>\nget compensation.  Rule 30 is not an instrument or machinery<br \/>\nfor asserting  the right  conferred by\tthe Act; it does not<br \/>\nregulate the procedure for settlement of disputes concerning<br \/>\nthat right.  Therefore, the  deletion of  the rule  in\t1963<br \/>\ncannot affect  pending actions. The rights of Khillu Ram and<br \/>\nTeju Mal  must be  governed by rule 30 which was in force in<br \/>\n1959 when  the dispute arose and was decided by the Managing<br \/>\nofficer. A  full Bench\tof the Punjab and Haryana High Court<br \/>\nin Pt.\tDev Raj\t v. Union of India &amp; ors.(1) considering the<br \/>\nsame question which arises for determination in this appeal,<br \/>\nheld  that   &#8220;a\t displaced   person  has   a  right  to\t the<br \/>\ndetermination  of   his\t claim\t for  compensation  and\t its<br \/>\nsatisfaction in the\n<\/p>\n<p>1) A. I. R. 1974 Pun. 65<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">81<\/span><br \/>\nprescribed manner  and this is a substantive right&#8221;, that so<br \/>\nfar as\trule 30\t is concerned  &#8220;the right  which a displaced<br \/>\nperson\tclaims\tunder  this  rule  ..  cannot  be  adversely<br \/>\naffected or  taken away unless it is expressly stated in the<br \/>\namending provision,  or the language of the Act This, in our<br \/>\nopinion, is  a correct\tstatement of  the  law.\t Neither  by<br \/>\nexpress words  nor by implication the amendment of the Rules<br \/>\nin 1963\t deleting rule\t30 has\tbeen made  retrospective  in<br \/>\noperation.\n<\/p>\n<p>     For these reasons the appeal fails and is dismissed but<br \/>\nwithout any order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<pre>V.P.S.\t\t\t\t\t   Appeal dismissed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">82<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 2275, 1976 SCR (2) 78 Author: A Gupta Bench: Gupta, A.C. PETITIONER: JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA &amp; ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: KHILLU RAM AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT06\/10\/1975 BENCH: GUPTA, [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-119305","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - 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\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\" \/>\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=\"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-16T03:15:11+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\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975\",\"datePublished\":\"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-16T03:15:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\"},\"wordCount\":1226,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\",\"name\":\"Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-16T03:15:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975\"}]},{\"@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":"Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - 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\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-16T03:15:11+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\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975","datePublished":"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-16T03:15:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2"},"wordCount":1226,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2","name":"Joint Secretary To The Government ... vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1975-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-16T03:15:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joint-secretary-to-the-government-vs-khillu-ram-and-anr-on-6-october-1975-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Joint Secretary To The Government &#8230; vs Khillu Ram And Anr on 6 October, 1975"}]},{"@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\/119305","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=119305"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119305\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119305"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119305"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119305"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}