{"id":143216,"date":"2011-08-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011"},"modified":"2017-03-18T05:27:03","modified_gmt":"2017-03-17T23:57:03","slug":"rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 24\/08\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA\n\nW.P.(MD)No.6348 of 2007\n\nRM.Venkatachalam               ... Petitioner\n\t\t\nVs.\n\n1.Indian Bank,\n  Rep. by its Chief Manager(HRM)\n  H.O.66, Rajaji Salai,\n  Chennai-600 001.\n\n2.The Assistant General Manager,\n  (HRM Section), Circle Office,\n  Indian Bank,\n  100-101, East Avanimoola Street,\n  Madurai-625 001.\n\n3.The Chief Manager,\n  Indian Bank,\n  Karikudi Branch,\n  Karaikudi.                     ... Respondents\n\nPRAYER\n\nWrit Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia praying to issue a Writ of  Certiorarifid Mandamus calling for the records\nrelating to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent bearing Ref.MCO:HRM, dated\n23.06.2007 and quash the same in so far as it directs re-fixing the petitioner's\nsalary retrospectively and consequently, direct the respondents from in any\nmanner effecting recovery from petitioner's salary consequent upon such re-\nfixation of salary.\n\n!For Petitioner\t  ... Mr.K.M.Ramesh\n^For R1 and R2    ... No appearance\nFor 3rd Respondent... Mr.Pala.Ramasamy\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioner has approached this court with a prayer, for issuance of a<br \/>\nwrit, in nature of certiorari, to quash the order, dated 23.06.2007, vide which,<br \/>\nthe salary of the petitioner has been re-fixed retrospectively and recovery of<br \/>\nexcess payment ordered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.The petitioner joined the service as &#8216;Sub-Staff&#8217; in the Indian Bank on<br \/>\n20.07.1972, and  promoted as &#8216;Clerk&#8217; in the year 1983. While, working as<br \/>\n&#8216;Clerk\/Shroff&#8217; in Royapettah Branch, Chennai, he was placed under suspension,<br \/>\nand charge memo for misconduct was issued, on 28th May 1990, and imposed a<br \/>\npunishment of warning.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.The stand of the respondents is that the petitioner accepted the charges<br \/>\nand regretted his misbehavior, and prayed for mercy, and agreed that the period<br \/>\nspent on suspension be treated as suspension period.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.It was, on the undertaking of the respondents that the suspension was<br \/>\nrevoked and the petitioner was issued minor punishment of warning, by treating<br \/>\nthe period of suspension as suspension period, but the petitioner was allowed<br \/>\nhis normal annual increment during the period of his suspension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.The stand of the petitioner is that Indian Bank Association, vide<br \/>\ncircular, dated 13th June 1992, advised the member banks to specify in the final<br \/>\norder, as to whether during the suspension period, the delinquent employee<br \/>\nshould be granted annual increment or not, and if no such mention is made, the<br \/>\nemployee is entitled to annual increment. It was also clarified that penalties<br \/>\nawarded prior to the date of issuance of advisory letter should not be re-<br \/>\nopened.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.On 15th July 1996, the petitioner was given the last stage annual<br \/>\nincrement and fixed permanent allowance.  As per the policy of the Bank, the<br \/>\npetitioner was also given first stagnation increment, when he reached the<br \/>\nmaximum pay scale, for clerical cadre, on 15th June 1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.The petitioner was, denied the 2nd stagnation increment, which according<br \/>\nto the petitioner, was due to him, on 15th July 2002.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.The case of the petitioner is that when representations were filed for<br \/>\nrelease of 2nd stagnation increment, he was informed, on 6th December 2005, that<br \/>\nthe petitioner was not entitled to increment during the period of suspension,<br \/>\nand that his salary was required to be re-fixed retrospectively, with effect<br \/>\nfrom 1989 and excess payment to be recovered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.The petitioner challenged the order, by way of W.P.No.19298 of 2006,<br \/>\nwhich was allowed, and the respondents were given liberty to proceed afresh,<br \/>\nafter giving show cause notice.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.The petitioner replied to the show cause notice, on 15th June 2007, but<br \/>\nwithout considering the reply, the impugned order was passed, re-fixing the<br \/>\nsalary of the petitioner with effect from 1989, and recovery of excess paid was<br \/>\nalso ordered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.The learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned order,<br \/>\nby contending that the order is  totally arbitrary and thus, hit by Article 14<br \/>\nof the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that once,<br \/>\nno order was passed, withholding the increment of the petitioner, he was<br \/>\nentitled to increments, in normal course.  The petitioner, therefore, was<br \/>\nrightly released the annual increments. Secondly, in absence of any<br \/>\nmisrepresentation or fraud, on the part of the petitioner, the amount paid could<br \/>\nnot be recovered even if paid wrongly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13.In view of the fact that punishment of warning was awarded to the<br \/>\npetitioner, he was entitled to increment from due date, even if he was not so<br \/>\nentitled during the period of suspension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14.The learned counsel appearing on the behalf of the respondents,<br \/>\nhowever, support the impugned order, by contending that the impugned order<br \/>\ncannot be faulted with, as the petitioner had admitted, his guilt before the<br \/>\nenquiry officer, and it was on his undertaking, that the period of suspension be<br \/>\ntreated, as suspension period, that he was ordered to be reinstated by awarding<br \/>\nminor punishment of warning.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15.It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents<br \/>\nthat once the petitioner admitted the period to be treated as suspension period,<br \/>\nhe was not entitled to increment. This fact was within his knowledge, therefore,<br \/>\nrecovery could also be ordered, after re-fixing the salary retrospectively. In<br \/>\nview of the Indian Bank Association Circular, dated 12th February 1987, clearly<br \/>\nlaying down that the person under suspension is not entitled to increment during<br \/>\nhis suspension period.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t16.On consideration, I find no force in the contentions of the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t17.An employee is entitled to annual increment as of a right, which can<br \/>\nonly be withheld, by specific order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t18.Once, there was no order, stopping the increment, by way of punishment,<br \/>\nthe petitioner was entitled to annual increment for every year of service,<br \/>\nrendered. Any other interpretation will defeat the very object of minor<br \/>\npunishment, and the punishment of warning will stand converted into a major<br \/>\npunishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect, which cannot be<br \/>\npermitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t19.The circular of the Indian Bank Association is misread by the<br \/>\nrespondents, in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner will not be<br \/>\nentitled to increment during the suspension period.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t20.The circular has to be read to lay down that during the period of<br \/>\nsuspension, delinquent may not be entitled to increments, but after the final<br \/>\norder is passed and an employee is exonerated or given a minor punishment, he<br \/>\nwould be entitled to annual increment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t21.The impugned order, re-fixing the pay of the petitioner is, thus,<br \/>\narbitrary, and amounts to colourable excise of power, thus violative of Article<br \/>\n14 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t22.As observed above, there was no question of recovery at all, as the<br \/>\npetitioner was granted increment by the respondents Bank, without any<br \/>\nmisrepresentation or  fraud on his part.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t23.In any case, this question need not deliberated further, as in this<br \/>\ncase, it is held that the petitioner was in-fact entitled to annual increment,<br \/>\ngranted to him, and there is no occasion, either to re-fix the salary or claim<br \/>\nof recovery, only because petitioner was under suspension for particular period.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t24.For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed and the<br \/>\nimpugned order is quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t25.No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>er<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24\/08\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA W.P.(MD)No.6348 of 2007 RM.Venkatachalam &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.Indian Bank, Rep. by its Chief Manager(HRM) H.O.66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001. 2.The Assistant General Manager, (HRM Section), Circle Office, Indian [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-143216","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - 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\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-17T23:57:03+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-17T23:57:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1012,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\",\"name\":\"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-17T23:57:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - 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\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-17T23:57:03+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-17T23:57:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011"},"wordCount":1012,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011","name":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-17T23:57:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rm-venkatachalam-vs-indian-bank-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rm.Venkatachalam vs Indian Bank on 24 August, 2011"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/143216","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=143216"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143216\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143216"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143216"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143216"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}