{"id":128464,"date":"2002-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002"},"modified":"2018-01-19T15:29:08","modified_gmt":"2018-01-19T09:59:08","slug":"dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","title":{"rendered":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Mahajan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S Mahajan<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>S.K. Mahajan, J.   <\/p>\n<p> 1. The   petitioner  claims  that  he  is   a   medical<br \/>\n         practitioner  in  Homoepathy  and  is  accredited  with  the<br \/>\n         special knowledge and experience in the treatment of Cancer.<br \/>\n         With  the objective to advance the cause of Homoepathy,  the<br \/>\n         petitioner  is stated to have established in 1996 a  Medical<br \/>\n         College  under the name and style of New Bombay Homoeopathic<br \/>\n         Medical  College  and Hospital in Sector 17,  Gurgaon.   The<br \/>\n         petitioner  is  alleged  to have spent some  amount  in  the<br \/>\n         purchase of land, construction of rooms, purchasing of books<br \/>\n         for  library,  furniture,  etc  and for  equipment  for  the<br \/>\n         laboratory  for the said college.  The petitioner thereafter<br \/>\n         applied  to the Government of Haryana to grant `No Objection<br \/>\n         Certificate&#8217;  to run the College.  On 8th August, 1996,  the<br \/>\n         Government  of Haryana issued a no-objection certificate  to<br \/>\n         start  the College for a period of two years, subject to the<br \/>\n         petitioner  seeking prior approval from the Central  Council<br \/>\n         of  Homoepathy.  Provisional affiliation was also granted to<br \/>\n         the  petitioner by the Maharishi Dayanand University for the<br \/>\n         academic year 1996-97.  On 24th August, 1996, the petitioner<br \/>\n         applied  with  the  Central Council of Homoepathy  to  grant<br \/>\n         approval for running a Medical College in Gurgaon.\n<\/p>\n<p>  2. By  letter  dated  13th December 1996,  the  Central<br \/>\n         Council  of  Homoepathy  constituted an inspection  team  to<br \/>\n         visit the premises of the petitioner.  The team appointed by<br \/>\n         the  Central  Council of Homoepathy visited the premises  on<br \/>\n         22nd  February, 1997 and submitted its report to the Central<br \/>\n         Government  for  taking appropriate decision in the  matter.<br \/>\n         According  to the report of the Council, the teaching  staff<br \/>\n         in  the College was insufficient in number and the  teaching<br \/>\n         staff also did not have the requisite teaching experience as<br \/>\n         per  the  Central Council&#8217;s norms.  The function of OPD  and<br \/>\n         IPD  were also not found to be sufficient.  According to the<br \/>\n         council,  the Department of Anatomy, physiology and pharmacy<br \/>\n         were not housed in sufficient accommodation as well and they<br \/>\n         did not have sufficient equipment and material for providing<br \/>\n         teaching  and practicals to the students.  Even the  audited<br \/>\n         accounts  of the College Management were not provided to the<br \/>\n         Inspection  Team,  during  the course  of  inspection.   The<br \/>\n         pharmacy  Department  was  situated  in  a  balcony  of  the<br \/>\n         bungalow  of the size of 12&#8217;X8&#8242; covered by bamboo sheets and<br \/>\n         no teaching material was found in the said Department.\n<\/p>\n<p> 3. After  this  report  was submitted  to  the  Central<br \/>\n         Government,  it again appointed a Committee to look into the<br \/>\n         question  as  to  whether permission could be given  to  the<br \/>\n         petitioner  to start a medical College.  The team  appointed<br \/>\n         by the Central Government visited the so called Institute of<br \/>\n         the  petitioner on 15th May, 1998 and submitted its  report.<br \/>\n         In  terms of the report, prepared by the Team, the so called<br \/>\n         Institute was a private consulting chamber of the petitioner<br \/>\n         and  his  associates  and  as   per  the  minimum   standard<br \/>\n         regulations  of the Central Council of Homoepathy, the space<br \/>\n         and  facility  available in the premises of  the  petitioner<br \/>\n         were  not  considered  suitable  to  run  the   Homoeopathic<br \/>\n         institution.   The team was, therefore, of the opinion  that<br \/>\n         request  of the petitioner for opening a homoepathy  college<br \/>\n         and   hospital  may  be  considered   only  if   the   basic<br \/>\n         infrastructure as per the Central Council of Homoepathy were<br \/>\n         made  available  to impart the training and teaching to  the<br \/>\n         students.   According  to  the report, the  Institution  was<br \/>\n         running as a Homoeopathic College and the number of teaching<br \/>\n         staff\/clinical  and non-clinical staff and other  facilities<br \/>\n         were almost Nil.\n<\/p>\n<p>  4. On  receipt of these reports, the Central Government<br \/>\n         by  its  orders dated 1st May, 1998 informed the  petitioner<br \/>\n         that  since the minimum facilities for running an Homoepathy<br \/>\n         College were not available in the so called Institute of the<br \/>\n         petitioner,  there was no scope for considering the  request<br \/>\n         of the petitioner to start the College and the Government at<br \/>\n         that  stage was not in a position to accord approval to  the<br \/>\n         College.   Being  aggrieved  by  the order  of  the  Central<br \/>\n         Government,  refusing to grant approval to the petitioner to<br \/>\n         open the College, the present petition has been filed by the<br \/>\n         petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>     5. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner<br \/>\n         is   that  necessary  infrastructure   and  facilities   are<br \/>\n         available  in  the  College  and the order  of  the  Central<br \/>\n         Government refusing to accord approval was contrary to facts<br \/>\n         on record.  It is contended that the petitioner had 12 rooms<br \/>\n         available  with  him for running the College  and  necessary<br \/>\n         staff  would  be  employed  only   after  the  students  get<br \/>\n         admission  in  the  College.  In my view, there is  a  basic<br \/>\n         fallacy  in  the  arguments  of   learned  counsel  for  the<br \/>\n         petitioner  in  as  much  as the  teaching  faculty  is  not<br \/>\n         appointed  after  the students are admitted in the  College,<br \/>\n         but first the teachers are appointed and only thereafter the<br \/>\n         students get admission in the Institute.  Moreover, in terms<br \/>\n         of  the  Homoepathy Central Council Act and the  Regulations<br \/>\n         framed  there under, it is the Central Council of  Homoepathy<br \/>\n         which  is  to  decide whether necessary  infrastructure  and<br \/>\n         teaching  facilities are available in the Institute so as to<br \/>\n         grant  its  approval  to run the College.  The  expert  body<br \/>\n         constituted under the Act has already given its opinion that<br \/>\n         the necessary teaching facilities and infrastructure has not<br \/>\n         been  available in the so called Institute.  In my  opinion,<br \/>\n         this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article<br \/>\n         226 of the Constitution cannot sit as an Court of Appeal and<br \/>\n         substitute  its own decision in place of the decision of the<br \/>\n         Central  Government.  Nothing has shown to this  Court  that<br \/>\n         any  error  of  law  has   been  committed  by  the  Central<br \/>\n         Government  or  that the principles of mutual  justice  have<br \/>\n         been  violated.   The  petition,  in   my  view,  is  wholly<br \/>\n         misconceived  and  deserves no consideration.  In  case  the<br \/>\n         necessary   infrastructure   is  made   available   by   the<br \/>\n         petitioner, he can, as observed in the order dated 21st May,<br \/>\n         1998,  make  necessary  application   for  approval  to  the<br \/>\n         respondent.   No  case whatsoever has been made out  by  the<br \/>\n         petitioner   for  interference  with   the  orders  of   the<br \/>\n         respondents.  Petition is accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 Author: S Mahajan Bench: S Mahajan JUDGMENT S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. The petitioner claims that he is a medical practitioner in Homoepathy and is accredited with the special knowledge and experience in the treatment of Cancer. With the [&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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - 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\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-19T09:59:08+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-19T09:59:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1019,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\",\"name\":\"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-19T09:59:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - 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\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-19T09:59:08+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002","datePublished":"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-19T09:59:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002"},"wordCount":1019,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002","name":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-19T09:59:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-a-m-mathur-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-1-september-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dr. A.M. Mathur vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 1 September, 2002"}]},{"@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\/128464","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=128464"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128464\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}