{"id":140261,"date":"2008-12-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008"},"modified":"2017-05-21T09:33:20","modified_gmt":"2017-05-21T04:03:20","slug":"modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jammu High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n \n HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU             \nSWP No. 1324 of 2007 AND SWP No. 1253 of 2007 AND SWP No. 1934 of 2007        \n Mohd. Alam \nPetiotioner\n State of J&amp;K &amp; Ors.\nRespondent  \n! Mr. F.A.Natnoo, Advocate.\n^ Mr. A.H.Qazi, AAG for R-1 &amp; 2 with Mr. S.K.Shukla, Advocate for R-3. Mr. Karnail\nSingh, Advocate vice Mr. O.P.Thakur, Advocate for R-4 to 6.\n\nMR. JUSTICE J.P.SINGH, JUDGE     \nDate : 26\/12\/2008\n: J U D G M E N T :\n<\/pre>\n<p>Connected Case  S W P No . 1694 of 2007   <\/p>\n<p>Modified Selection Criterion for selection, against the<br \/>\nposts of Patwaries advertised vide Notification No. 10 of<br \/>\n2005, notified in Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection<br \/>\nBoard, Srinagar&#8217;s Notice No. 01 of 2007 dated 17.05.2007,<br \/>\nhas been questioned in all these petitions.<br \/>\nPetitioners&#8217; Grievance, in nut-shell, is that the<br \/>\nmodified criterion adopted by the Jammu and Kashmir<br \/>\nServices Selection Board, hereinafter to be referred as the<br \/>\n&#8216;Board&#8217;, pertaining to assessment of candidates&#8217;<br \/>\nknowledge of Urdu, at the time of interview, rather than<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">2<\/span><br \/>\nat the time of Short Listing, as notified earlier, is unfair,<br \/>\nirrational, besides being arbitrary, and is liable to be<br \/>\nquashed being violative of Articles 14 &amp; 16 of the<br \/>\nConstitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>Justifying the modified criterion, the Board says that<br \/>\nthere was no substantial change in the two criteria i.e.<br \/>\none notified earlier and the other notified vide notification<br \/>\nimpugned in the writ petitions, in that, the Board had<br \/>\nonly shifted testing of candidates&#8217; knowledge of Urdu,<br \/>\nfrom the stage of Short Listing of candidates, to the stage<br \/>\nof interview, necessity wherefor had arisen in view of large<br \/>\nand highly disproportionate number of candidates against<br \/>\nthe posts which had been advertised and the nonavailability<br \/>\nof indicators to prejudge the candidates&#8217;<br \/>\nknowledge of Urdu at the time of Short Listing. A<br \/>\nconscious decision had thus been taken to modify the<br \/>\ncriterion by simultaneously providing for calling<br \/>\ncandidates in the ratio of 1:10 instead of 1:5, thereby<br \/>\nbroadening the area of competition to ensure that<br \/>\nsufficient number of candidates at least in the ratio of<br \/>\n1:5 possessing knowledge of Urdu remained available for<br \/>\ncompetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>I have considered the submissions made at the Bar.<br \/>\nIn order to resolve the issue as to whether or not the<br \/>\nmodified criterion is justified, regard needs to be had to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">3<\/span><br \/>\nthe criterion which had been fixed in terms of Notice No.<br \/>\n01 of 2007 and the one which had been notified prior<br \/>\nthereto. These two criteria are reproduced hereunder for<br \/>\nreference:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Earlier Notified Criterion:\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) 10+2 = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) Knowledge of<br \/>\nUrdu through test = 20 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv) Post Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(v) Viva Voce = 20 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>Revised Creterion:\n<\/p>\n<p>(A) For short listing :\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) 10 + 2 = 40 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) Post Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(B) Criterion for selection :\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) 10 + 2 = 40 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) Post Graduation = 10 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv) Knowledge of Urdu<br \/>\nto be tested at the time of<br \/>\ninterview = 20 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>(v) Viva Voce = 20 points.\n<\/p>\n<p>The concluding paragraph of Notice No. 01 of 2007<br \/>\ntoo needs to be noticed. This reads thus:-<br \/>\n&#8220;Knowledge of Urdu being part of eligibility<br \/>\ncriteria, if during the time of interview it is<br \/>\nfound that the candidate does not have<br \/>\nknowledge of Urdu his candidature shall be<br \/>\nrejected out-rightly. The area of consideration is<br \/>\nincreased for 1:5 to 1:10 as one time<br \/>\nexception.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Perusal of the above extracted two criteria<br \/>\ndemonstrates that all that the Board had done vide<br \/>\nnotification impugned in these writ petition, was to Short<br \/>\nList the candidates on the basis of their academic<br \/>\nqualification ear-marking 40 points for 10 + 2, additional<br \/>\n10 points for Graduation and 10 points for Post<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">4<\/span><br \/>\nGraduation, meaning thereby that the Short Listing had to<br \/>\nbe done by the Board on the basis of academic merit so as<br \/>\nto see that academically meritorious candidates alone are<br \/>\nconsidered for interview where their knowledge of Urdu<br \/>\ntoo had to be evaluated.\n<\/p>\n<p>I do not find any irrationality, or for that matter<br \/>\narbitrariness or unfairness, as urged by petitioners&#8217;<br \/>\ncounsel, in the criterion the Board had adopted for Short<br \/>\nListing candidates. This is so because what had been<br \/>\nintended by the Board was to select best available talent,<br \/>\nassessing their merit on the basis of educational<br \/>\nqualification. The criterion adopted for Short Listing of<br \/>\ncandidates for the posts of Patwaries, does neither dilute<br \/>\nnor affect, in any manner whatsoever, assessment of merit<br \/>\nof candidates in so far as it pertained to acquisition of<br \/>\nother necessary qualification which a candidate must<br \/>\npossess for seeking selection for the post of Patwari i.e. his<br \/>\nknowledge of Urdu, in that, the Board had specifically<br \/>\nprovided for, assessment of candidates knowledge of<br \/>\nUrdu, at the time of the interview, in the modified<br \/>\ncriterion.\n<\/p>\n<p>Petitioners&#8217; counsel, Mr. Natnoo&#8217;s submission that<br \/>\nthe Board had devised the criterion of evaluating<br \/>\ncandidates knowledge of Urdu, at the time of interview<br \/>\nwas a mere eye-wash, to select only blue-eyed persons,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">5<\/span><br \/>\ngets knocked down with the statement which the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the Board had made at the Bar, on the basis<br \/>\nof the records maintained by the Board, that the Board<br \/>\nhad while conducting interview, held both oral as well as<br \/>\nwritten test of candidates called for the interview, to<br \/>\nevaluate their merit regarding their knowledge of Urdu.<br \/>\nBoard&#8217;s action of broadening the zone of competition<br \/>\namongst candidates in calling candidates in the ratio of<br \/>\n1:10 as against earlier notified criterion of 1:5, too cannot<br \/>\nbe said to affect petitioners&#8217; right of consideration. This, on<br \/>\nthe other hand, demonstrates fairness of the Selection<br \/>\nAuthority in providing opportunity of competition to more<br \/>\ncompetitors i.e. double the number of candidates, who<br \/>\nwould have been otherwise eligible to appear at the<br \/>\ninterview had the earlier criterion remained unmodified.<br \/>\nFor all what has been said above, I do not find any<br \/>\nvice of unconstitutionality, arbitrariness or unfairness in<br \/>\nthe modified criterion notified vide Notice No. 01 of 2007<br \/>\ndated 17.05.2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>Petitioners&#8217; challenge to the Notice impugned in the<br \/>\nwrit petitions, therefore, fails.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Board&#8217;s action of Short Listing of candidates on<br \/>\nthe basis of modified criterion, rejecting petitioners&#8217; candidature<br \/>\nfor the posts of Patwaries, therefore, does not<br \/>\nviolate any enforceable right of the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Lacking in substance, these writ petitions are<br \/>\naccordingly dismissed vacating the interim directions.<br \/>\nA copy of this judgment shall be placed on each file.<br \/>\n(J.P.Singh)<br \/>\nJudge<br \/>\nJammu<br \/>\n26.12.2008<br \/>\nPawan Chopra<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jammu High Court Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU SWP No. 1324 of 2007 AND SWP No. 1253 of 2007 AND SWP No. 1934 of 2007 Mohd. Alam Petiotioner State of J&amp;K &amp; Ors. Respondent ! Mr. F.A.Natnoo, Advocate. ^ Mr. A.H.Qazi, [&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":[8,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-140261","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jammu-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - 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\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-21T04:03:20+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\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-21T04:03:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":968,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jammu High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-21T04:03:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 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":"Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - 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\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-21T04:03:20+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\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-21T04:03:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008"},"wordCount":968,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jammu High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008","name":"Modified Selection Criterion For ... vs Unknown on 26 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-21T04:03:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/modified-selection-criterion-for-vs-unknown-on-26-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Modified Selection Criterion For &#8230; vs Unknown on 26 December, 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\/140261","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=140261"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140261\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=140261"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=140261"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=140261"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}