{"id":150024,"date":"2009-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009"},"modified":"2016-10-12T21:12:11","modified_gmt":"2016-10-12T15:42:11","slug":"shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009<\/div>\n
                     Central Information Commission\n                          2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,\n                       Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066\n                               Website: www.cic.gov.in\n\n                                                         Decision No. 4337\/IC(A)\/2009\n\n                                                           F. No. CIC\/MA\/A\/2009\/00555\n\n                                                       Dated, the 1st September, 2009\n\nName of the Appellant                 :       Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam\n\nName of the Public Authority          :       National Institute of Rural Development\n         1\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
1.       Shri Anish Gandhi, a social worker, sent the following e-mail to the DG,
\nNIRD, Shri B.K. Sinha on 25.05.2008, in response to which he was appointed as
\nAdvisor to NIRD vide order no. 460 dated 18.8.2008:\n<\/p>\n
         “Dear Sir,
\n         Please find attached my Bio Data. I would like to be associated with NIRD
\n         in any capacity\/assignment as you think I will best suited for.
\n         I would like to work for the institute in a token salary of Re. 1 with only
\n         TA\/DA as applicable. Since I am based at New Delhi. I would request you
\n         to station the undersigned in Delhi with appropriate office space.
\n         I assure you of my best services at all times.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Regards,
\n         Anish Gandhi,
\n         E-9\/24, Vasant Vihar,
\n         New Delhi-110057.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Mob: 9810015480.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
2.       In this regard, the appellant asked for the following information through his
\napplication dated 24.11.2008:\n<\/p>\n
                              If you don’t ask, you don’t get – Mahatma Gandhi<\/p>\n
                                             1<\/span>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      i) Copy of the advertisement issued for the post (with details of pay scale
\n          etc.) against which Shri Anish Gandhi was appointed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     ii) Copy of the application submitted by Shri Anish Gandhi for the post in
\n          NIRD together the details of IPO\/DD towards application fee submitted.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     iii) List of short listed candidates for the post.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     iv) Details       of      the     selection     committee     constituted    for
\n          selection\/recommendations of the candidates for the post.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     v) Details of written test\/interview if any conducted and details of candidates
\n          who appeared for the test\/interview.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     vi) A copy of the minutes of the selection committee recommending his name
\n          of the post.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     vii) Details of the competent authority who had approved his appointment in
\n          NIRD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     viii)A copy of the offer of appointment issued to Shri Anish Gandhi.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     ix) If the appointment is on contract basis, a copy of the contract agreement
\n          executed by him in favour of NIRD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
3.       In his complaint before the Commission, the appellant has alleged that the
\nPIO has neither responded to his RTI application nor complied with the Appellate
\nAuthority’s orders. During the hearing, the appellant made the following
\naverments:\n<\/p>\n
     \u2022   The appellant submitted his 1st appeal on 7.1.2009, as he hid not receive
\n         CPIO’s response to his RTI application dated 24.11.2008.
\n     \u2022   Even the Appellate Authority’s order dated 23.1.2009 and 27.4.2009, were
\n         ignored by the CPIO.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     \u2022   The CPIO replied on 10.6.2009, after a complaint was submitted to
\n         Central Information Commission, in which it was stated that a reply, as
\n         under, was sent vide letter dated 24.12.2008;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                                  “No. Admn. A\/A5\/2009\/RTI\/PIO\/9
\n                                                              December 24, 2008
\nTo
\nShri V. Gopalam,
\nH.No. 6-3-596\/63\/7, Naveennagar,
\nKhairatabad,
\nHyderabad-500004.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                          2<\/span><\/p>\n
 Sir,
\n            Sub: Information sought under RTI Act, 2005- reg.
\n            Ref: Your application dt. 24.11.2008<\/p>\n
       With reference to your application cited above, information as available is
\nfurnished below:\n<\/p>\n
Sl. No.         Information sought                  Information available\n<\/p>\n
    1.          Copy of the advertisement issued    There was no advertisement
\n                for the post (with details of pay   issued as the post is not a
\n                scale etc.) against which Shri      sanctioned post.
\n                Anish Gandhi was appointed.\n<\/p>\n
       2.       Copy of the application submitted Enclosed
\n                by Shri Anish Gandhi for the post
\n                in NIRD together the details of
\n                IPO\/DD towards application fee
\n                submitted.\n<\/p>\n
       3.       List of short listed candidates for Since the post was not
\n                the post.                           advertised, the question of short
\n                                                    listing of candidates does not
\n                                                    arise.\n<\/p>\n
       4.       Details of the selection committee In view of the reply at Sl. No. 1
\n                constituted                     for above, it is not applicable.
\n                selection\/recommendations of the
\n                candidates for the post.\n<\/p>\n
       5.       Details of written test\/interview if Same reply as at Sl. No. 4
\n                any conducted and details of
\n                candidates who appeared for the
\n                test\/interview.\n<\/p>\n
       6.       A copy of the minutes of the In view of the reply at Sl. No. 1,
\n                selection           committee it is not applicable
\n                recommending his name of the
\n                post.\n<\/p>\n
       7.       Details of the competent authority Directore General
\n                who had approved his appointment
\n                in NIRD.\n<\/p>\n
       8.       A copy of the offer of appointment Enclosed
\n                issued to Shri Anish Gandhi.\n<\/p>\n
       9.       If the appointment is on contract Since this is not a contract<\/p>\n
                                            3<\/span>
\n              basis, a copy of the contract appointment, copy                  of   the
\n             agreement executed by him in contract agreement                  is   not
\n             favour of NIRD.               available.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                      Yours faithfully,
\n                                                            Public Information Officer
\nEncl: As above.”\n<\/p>\n
4.      The appellant stated that the above letter, purported to have been sent to
\nthe appellant, is an after thought creation of PIO. If the above mentioned letter
\nwas issued, why was it not supplied to the appellant when the Appellate Authority
\nof the respondent Shri K. Niranjan Rao, Director (FM) & FA ordered for providing
\nthe information vide his two letters, mentioned above.\n<\/p>\n
5.      In view of foregoing, the appellant alleged that:\n<\/p>\n
     (i) the respondent has committed grave irregularities in appointment of
\n           Advisor as the principles of natural justice have been violated by depriving
\n           of opportunities of appointment to other eligible persons;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (ii) the PIO has not only violated the provisions of the Act as she did not
\n           respond for over six months but also lied that the information was
\n           furnished on 24.11.08;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (iii) the PIO did not comply with the orders of the Appellate Authority and
\n           therefore the appellant was constrained to submit his complaint to Central
\n           Information Commission;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (iv) though the Advisor to NIRD has been appointed on a monthly salary of Re
\n           1\/- p.m., a huge amount of money, over Rupees fifty thousand per month
\n           was paid under different heads to the Advisor, in question, who does not
\n           possess requisite professional experience to promote the mandate of the
\n           respondent; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (v) the information furnished to him is incomplete and misleading. He
\n           therefore pleaded for imposition of penalty u\/s 20 (1) of the Act and award
\n           of monetary compensation for unnecessary harassment in the matter of
\n           accessing information relating corrupt practices of the respondent.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
6.      In her written submission dated August 24, 2009, the PIO Ms.
\nDhanlakshmi, Registrar & Director (Admn.) has stated that;\n<\/p>\n
                                           4<\/span><\/p>\n
      (i) the RTI application dated 24.11.2008 was replied on 24.12.2008 and
\n        complete information was furnished; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (ii) the appellant, an ex-employee, is a habitual litigant, who has so far
\n        submitted over 50 RTI applications on different issues, all of which have
\n        been replied and required information were furnished.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Decision:\n<\/p>\n
7.      In his complaint before the Commission, the appellant has alleged about
\nthe non- compliance of the orders dated 23.1.2009 and 27.4.2009, passed by
\nShri K. Niranjan Rao, Appellate Authority of the respondent, who had directed the
\nPIO to furnish the information. The question is: Why did the Appellate Authority
\nrepeatedly aske the PIO to furnish the information, if it was provided vide letter
\n24.12.08, as contended by the PIO in her submission before the Commission.
\nClearly, there is either some communication gap between PIO and Appellate
\nAuthority of the respondent or the requested information was not furnished, as
\nalleged by the appellant, till he took up the matter with the Commission. We are
\ntherefore of the view that PIO has created the response dated 24.12.08 as an
\nafter thought for her defence. This is also corroborated from the fact that the PIO
\nhas not offered any comment on the alleged non-compliance of Appellate
\nAuthority’s orders. If a timely response to the appellant was given, the same
\nshould have been reflected in the orders by Appellate Authority and the
\ncomments submitted by the PIO to the Commission. We therefore conclude that
\nthe PIO’s purported response of dated 24.12.09 was prepared and sent, after the
\nappellant approached this Commission. In view of this, the PIO, Ms.
\nDhanlakshmi is held responsible for violation of section 7 (1) of the Act, as she
\ndid not furnish the information within the stipulated period of thirty days. She also
\nignored the two directions passed by the Appellate Authority and has thus shown
\nlackadaisical attitude towards the implementation of the provisions of the Act. It is
\nalso inferred that since the issue raised by the appellant pertain to alleged
\nirregularities in appointment of Advisor, including misuse of discretionary powers
\nby the competent authority, the PIO has malafiedly denied the information to<\/p>\n
                                         5<\/span>
\n maintain secrecy in the appointment, in question. The PIO, Ms. Dhanlakshmi is
\ntherefore directed to show cause as to why a maximum amount of Rs. 25,000\/-
\nshould not be imposed on her as penalty u\/s 20 (1) of the Act for inordinate delay
\nin supply of information. She should submit her explanation at the earliest and
\nalso appear for a personal hearing on September 29, 2009 at 12.30 pm., failing
\nwhich penalty would be imposed.\n<\/p>\n
8.    The appellant has pursued the matter through several letters and
\nreminders and approach this Commission also. He appeared for hearing on
\n27.08.2009 while the PIO made a written submission, which could have been
\navoided, had the Appellate Authority’s orders were complied with or the PIO had
\nsent a timely response. He has surely suffered all kinds of losses-time and
\nresources, in pursuing the matter with the respondent, with a sole objective of
\nexposing corrupt practices in appointment of Advisor and alleged mis-use of
\npublic funds to extend favour to a person. The Director General of the
\nrespondent, or his nominee, should explain as to why an amount of Rs. 25,000\/-
\nshould not be awarded as compensation u\/s 19 (8) (b) of the Act for the
\ndetriment suffered by the appellant due to deemed refusal of information and
\nconsequent harassments by the officials of the respondent. The Director General
\nor his nominee, should also appear for a personal hearing on the date and time
\nindicated above, failing which compensation would be awarded. The appellant
\nmay also be present.\n<\/p>\n
9.    The appeal is thus disposed of.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                    Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                                              (Prof. M.M. Ansari)
\n                                               Central Information Commissioner<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy:\n<\/p>\n
(M.C. Sharma)
\nAssistant Registrar<\/p>\n
                                        6<\/span>
\n Name and address of parties: 2<\/p>\n
   1. Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam, H.No.                6-3-596\/63\/7,       Naveen    Nagar,
\n      Khairathabad, Hyderabad-500004.\n<\/p>\n
   2. Ms. Dhanlakshmi, Assistant Registrar(T) & PIO, National Institute of Rural
\n      Development, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030.\n<\/p>\n
   3. Shri K. Niranjan Rao, Director (FM) & FA & Appellate Authority, National
\n      Institute of Rural Development, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030.\n<\/p>\n
   4. The Director General, National Institute                of     Rural   Development,
\n      Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030.\n<\/p>\n
                      All men by nature desire to know – Aristotle<\/p>\n
                                           7<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009 Central Information Commission 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 Website: www.cic.gov.in Decision No. 4337\/IC(A)\/2009 F. No. CIC\/MA\/A\/2009\/00555 Dated, the 1st September, 2009 Name of the Appellant : Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam Name of the Public Authority […]<\/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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-150024","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-12T15:42:11+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\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-12T15:42:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1658,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-12T15:42:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-12T15:42:11+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\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-12T15:42:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009"},"wordCount":1658,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009","name":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural ... on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-12T15:42:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-vanimisetti-gopalam-vs-national-institute-of-rural-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Vanimisetti Gopalam vs National Institute Of Rural … on 1 September, 2009"}]},{"@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\/150024","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=150024"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150024\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=150024"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=150024"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=150024"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}