{"id":155974,"date":"1989-11-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1989-11-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2"},"modified":"2015-11-08T23:34:45","modified_gmt":"2015-11-08T18:04:45","slug":"shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","title":{"rendered":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 307, \t\t 1989 SCR Supl. (2) 201<\/div>\n
Author: K Singh<\/div>\n
Bench: Singh, K.N. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSHRIDHAR SON OF RAM DULAR\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nNAGAR PALIKA, JAUNPUR AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT17\/11\/1989\n\nBENCH:\nSINGH, K.N. (J)\nBENCH:\nSINGH, K.N. (J)\nKASLIWAL, N.M. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1990 AIR  307\t\t  1989 SCR  Supl. (2) 201\n 1990 SCC  Supl.  157\t  JT 1989 (4)\t327\n 1989 SCALE  (2)1115\n\n\nACT:\n    U.P.   Municipalities  Act,\t 1916:\t Section   71--Scope\nof--Whether  confers  power on State Govt. to  issue  direc-\ntions,\tregulating  the conditions of service  of  Municipal\nEmployees.\n    Tax Inspector--Appointment of--Whether to be exclusively\nfilled\t   by\t promotion--Government's     Order     dated\n10.4.50--Applicability of.\n    Practice  and  Procedure:  Judicial\t  discipline--Single\nJudge  disagreeing with another Single Judge--Matter  should\nbe referred to a Larger Bench.\n    Administrative\tLaw--Principles\t     of\t     natural\njustice--Violation of--Effect.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    The\t Municipal Board, Jaunpur invited  applications\t for\nthe  post  of Tax Inspector. The employees  working  in\t the\nRevenue Department of the Municipal Board were eligible\t for\nconsideration alongwith the outsiders. Respondent No. 3, the\nseniormost Tax Collector in Municipal Board, was called\t for\ninterview but he refused to appear on the plea that the post\nof  Tax Inspector should be exclusively filled by  promotion\nand being the seniormost Tax Collector he should be promoted\nwithout\t considering  any outsider. Ignoring his  claim\t the\nMunicipal Board selected and appointed the appellant to\t the\npost  of Tax Inspector. Respondent No. 3 represented to\t the\nCommissioner  challenging the appellant's  appointment.\t The\nCommissioner set aside the order of the Municipal Board\t and\ncancelled the appellant's appointment holding that  pursuant\nto the directions contained in the Government's Order  dated\n10.4.50,  Respondent  No. 3 was entitled to  promotion.\t The\nappellant  challenged  the Commissioner's order\t before\t the\nHigh  Court by filing a writ petition. Disagreeing with\t the\ndecision of another Single Judge, a Single Judge of the High\nCourt dismissed the writ petition, and affirmed the order of\nthe  Commissioner on the findings that the  appellant's\t ap-\npointment  was made in violation of the\t Government's  Order\ndated 10.4.50. Hence this appeal.\n202\n    Allowing  the appeal and setting aside the order of\t the\nHigh Court, this Court,\n    HELD:  1. The orders of the High Court and\tthe  Commis-\nsioner are not sustainable in law. [208B]\n    1.1.  It is a well-settled principle of judicial  disci-\npline that if a Single Judge disagrees with the decision  of\nanother Single Judge, it is proper to refer the matter to  a\nlarger\tBench  for  an authoritative decision.\tBut  in\t the\ninstant\t case,\tthe learned Single Judge of the\t High  Court\nacted  contrary to the well established principles of  judi-\ncial discipline in ignorning those decisions. [205B-C]\n    2.\tSection\t 71  of the U.P.  Municipalities  Act,\t1916\nbefore\tits  amendment in 1964 did not confer power  on\t the\nState  Government  to  issue any  direction  regulating\t the\nconditions of service of Municipal employees. [205D]\n    Ramesher  Prasad and Ors. v. Municipal Board,  Pilibhit,\nA.I.R. 1958 All. 363; Ram Kripal Garg v. State of U.P., Writ\nPetition No. 4556 of 1965 dated 16.9.66 and Inder Bahadur v.\nMunicipal Board, Mirzapur and Ors., Writ petition No. 235 of\n1970 dated 20.10.1972 approved.\n    2. I Even after conceding supervisory power to the State\nGovernment  to\tissue directions laying down  conditions  of\nservice\t of Municipal employees, there are no directions  in\nthe  Government\t Order dated 10-4-50 requiring\ta  Municipal\nBoard  to fill the post of Tax Inspector only  by  promotion\nand not by direct recruitment. Therefore, it was open to the\nMunicipal  Board  to  make appointment to the  post  of\t Tax\nInspector  either  by direct recruitment  or  by  promotion.\n[205G; 207D]\n    2.2 In the instant case, the Municipal Board gave oppor-\ntunity\tto  its employees working in the  revenue  class  of\nservice to appear for selection in competition with  outsid-\ners. Respondent No. 3 however did not avail the\t opportunity\nfor  which he himself is to be blamed. The  Municipal  Board\nacted  within its jurisdiction in making appointment to\t the\npost of Tax Inspector by direct recruitment. [207E]\n     2.3  A  Govt. Order declared ultra vires  by  the\tHigh\nCourt,\tcould not be revived by any subsequent\tGovt.  Order\nwithout there being any statutory power for the same. [205E]\n3. It is an elementary principle of natural justice that  no\nperson\n203\nshould\tbe condemned without hearing. The order of  appoint-\nment  conferred a vested right in the appellant to hold\t the\npost  of Tax Inspector, that right could not be\t taken\taway\nwithout\t affording  an opportunity of hearing  to  him.\t Any\norder  passed  in  violation of the  principles\t of  natural\njustice\t is rendered void. In the instant case, there is  no\ndispute that the Commissioner's order had been passed  with-\nout  affording any opportunity of hearing to the  appellant.\nTherefore  the\torder was illegal and void. The\t High  Court\ncommitted  serious  error in  upholding\t the  Commissioner's\norder  setting\taside the  appellant's\tappointment  without\ngiving any notice or opportunity to him. [207G-H; 208A]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
    CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2967  of
\n1986.\n<\/p>\n
    From  the  Judgment\t and Order dated  28.7.1986  of\t the
\nAllahabad High Court in W.P. No. 1793 of 1980.
\n    Satish  Chandra, R.B. Mehrotra, S.K. Mehta,\t Atul  Nanda
\nand Aman Vachher for the Appellant.\n<\/p>\n
    J.M.  Khanna,  R.B. Misra and Ms. Anil Katiyar  for\t the
\nRespondents.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n    SINGH,  J. This appeal is directed against the  judgment
\nand order of the High Court of Allahabad dated July 28, 1986
\ndismissing the appellant’s petition under Article 226 of the
\nConstitution  challenging  the\torder  of  the\tCommissioner
\nVaranasi Division dated February 13, 1980 setting aside\t the
\norder  of Municipal Board, Jaunpur appointing the  appellant
\nas Tax Inspector.\n<\/p>\n
    The Municipal Board, Jaunpur issued advertisement invit-
\ning applications for appointment to the post of Tax  Inspec-
\ntor. The advertisement stated that the existing employees of
\nthe Revenue Department of the Municipal Board were  eligible
\nfor consideration along with outsiders. Hari Mohan  Respond-
\nent  No. 3 who was the senior most Tax Collector working  in
\nthe Municipal Board, Jaunpur was called for interview but he
\nrefused\t to  appear for the interview on the plea  that\t the
\npost of Tax Inspector should have been exclusively filled by
\npromotion  and\tas he was the seniormost  Tax  Collector  he
\nshould\tbe  promoted without considering any  outsider.\t The
\nMunicipal  Board ignored, his claim and selected the  appel-
\nlant, and appointed
\n204<\/span>
\nhim  to\t the post of the Tax Inspector by  the\torder  dated
\n11.3.78. Respondent No. 3 thereafter filed a claim  petition
\nbefore\tthe  Services Tribunal constituted  under  the\tU.P.
\nPublic\tServices  Tribunals Act, 1976  but  subsequently  he
\nwithdrew the same on 23.12.79. Thereafter he filed a  repre-
\nsentation to the Prescribed Authority i.e. the\tCommissioner
\nVaranasi challenging appellant’s appointment to the post  of
\nTax  Inspector. The Commissioner by his order dated  13.2.80
\nset aside the order of the Municipal Board and cancelled the
\nappellant’s  appointment on the ground that  the  Respondent
\nNo.  3 was entitled to promotion in pursuance to the  direc-
\ntions  contained in the Government Order dated 10.4.50.\t The
\nappellant  filed  a writ petition under Article 226  of\t the
\nConstitution before the High Court challenging the order  of
\nthe Commission. A learned Single Judge (B.D. Agarwal, J.) of
\nthe High Court of Allahabad dismissed the writ petition\t and
\naffirmed the order of the Commissioner on the findings\tthat
\nthe  appellant’s  appointment was made in violation  of\t the
\nGovernment Order dated 10.4.50. Hence this appeal.
\n    After heating learned counsel for the parties at  length
\nwe are of the opinion that the High Court committed manifest
\nerror in upholding the order of the Commissioner. The  basic
\nquestion which arises for consideration is whether the\tpost
\nof Tax Inspector, under the provision of the U.P. Municipal-
\nities  Act, 1916 (hereinafter referred to as the  ‘Act’)  or
\nany  rules framed thereunder or under the  Government  Order
\ndated 10.4.1950 the post of Tax Inspector was required to be
\nfilled by promotion only and not by direct recruitment.\t The
\nPrescribed  Authority i.e., the Commissioner as well as\t the
\nHigh Court both proceeded on the assumption that the Govern-
\nment  Order dated 10.4.50 had been issued by the State\tGov-
\nernment in exercise of its supervisory powers under s. 71 of
\nthe  Act and as such it was binding on the Municipal  Board,
\nand the directions contained therein required the  Municipal
\nBoard  to fill up the post of Tax Inspector  exclusively  by
\npromotion  and\tnot  by direct recruitment.  In\t making\t the
\nappellant’s  appointment as a direct recruit, the  Municipal
\nBoard acted in violation of the directions contained in\t the
\naforesaid  Government  Order,  therefore,  the\t appellant’s
\nappointment was rendered illegal. The High Court upheld\t the
\norder of the Prescribed Authority on these findings. Learned
\ncounsel\t for  the appellant urged that the  directions\tcon-
\ntained\tin  the Government Order dated\t10.4.50\t were  ultra
\nvires the State Government’s powers under s. 71 of the\tAct.
\nHe placed reliance on Ramesher Prasad and Other v. Municipal
\nBoard,\tPilibhit,  AIR 1958 All. 363.  The  learned  counsel
\nfurther\t urged that the aforesaid decision was\tapproved  by
\ntwo other learned Judges of the High Court in
\n205<\/span>
\nRam Kripal Garg v. State of U.P., Writ Petition No. 4556  of
\n1965  dated  16.9.66 and Inder Bahadur v.  Municipal  Board,
\nMirzapur  and  Others, Writ Petition No. 235 of\t 1970  dated
\n20.10.72 holding that the Government Order dated 10.4.50 was
\nultra vires. These decisions were placed before the  learned
\nSingle Judge but he did not agree with the view taken in the
\naforesaid  decisions  instead  he took a  contrary  view  in
\nholding\t that the Government Order dated 10.4.50  was  valid
\nand  it required the Municipal Board to fill up the post  of
\nTax Inspector only by promotion. It is well settled  princi-
\nple  of\t judicial  discipline as has been  reiterated  in  a
\nnumber\tof decisions of this Court that if a. Single  Judge,
\ndisagrees  with the decision of another Single Judge, it  is
\nproper to refer the matter to a larger Bench for an authori-
\ntative\tdecision. But in the instant case the learned  Judge
\nacted  contrary to the well established principles of  judi-
\ncial discipline in ignoring those decisions.
\n    Section  71 of the Act before its amendment in 1964\t did
\nnot confer power on the State Government to issue any direc-
\ntion  regulating  the  conditions of  service  of  Municipal
\nemployees.  The\t view taken by the High\t Court\tin  Ramesher
\nPrasad case and followed in other two cases, is correct. The
\nHigh  Court placed reliance on the Government  Orders  dated
\n27.4.57, 9.12.59 and 30.1.72 in holding that the  directions
\ncontained in Government Order dated 10.4.50 were binding  on
\nthe  Municipal\tBoard. We have gone  through  the  aforesaid
\nGovernment  Orders  and Notifications but  we  find  nothing
\ntherein\t to clothe the Government Order dated  10.4.50\twith
\nstatutory character. A Government Order declared ultra vires
\nby High Court could not be revived by any subsequent Govern-
\nment  Order without there being any statutory power for\t the
\nsame. Moreover the aforesaid Government Orders and Notifica-
\ntions  do not contain any direction requiring the  Municipal
\nBoard  to fill up the post of Tax Inspector  exclusively  by
\npromotion.  The High Court committed error in upholding\t the
\nCommissioner’s order.\n<\/p>\n
    We\thave closely scrutinised the Government Order  dated
\n10.4.50 (Annexure 1 to the petition) with the assistance  of
\nthe counsel for the parties. But even after conceding super-
\nvisory\tpower  to the State Government to  issue  directions
\nlaying down conditions of service of Municipal employees, we
\ndo  not\t find any directions therein requiring\ta  Municipal
\nBoard  to fill the post of Tax Inspector only  by  promotion
\nand  not  by  direct recruitment. Learned  counsel  for\t the
\nrespondent  placed  reliance on paragraphs 5 and  6  of\t the
\nGovernment Order in support of his contention that the\tpost
\nof  Tax\t Inspector was required to be  filled  by  promotion
\nonly.  Paragraphs  5 and 6 of the Government Order  read  as
\nunder:\n<\/p>\n
206<\/span><\/p>\n
\t      “5. In the case of the posts mentioned in\t the
\n\t      annexure promotions should, as a rule, be made
\n\t      from the lower to the higher posts or  grades,
\n\t      as  the  case  may be, in the  same  class  of
\n\t      Service  Subject\tto the general\torders\tcon-
\n\t      tained in the above paragraphs. The prevailing
\n\t      practice’of  transferring at random  officials
\n\t      in  one class of service to another should  be
\n\t      stopped.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      6. When direct recruitment to any post  speci-
\n\t      fied in the annexure had to be made it will be
\n\t      governed\tby  the\t educational  qualifications
\n\t      shown  therein.  Recruitments  to\t posts\tfrom
\n\t      outside should, however, as far as possible be
\n\t      made  by inviting applications through  adver-
\n\t      tisement\tin the press and making a  selection
\n\t      therefrom preferably be means of a competitive
\n\t      test. Local Bodies may also be advised to form
\n\t      a Committee consisting of the Chairman or\t the
\n\t      President, the Executive Officer or the Secre-
\n\t      tary,  as the case may be, and  the  principal
\n\t      administrative   officer\tof  the\t  department
\n\t      concerned, to make a selection from among\t the
\n\t      applicants  for a vacant post by\tinterviewing
\n\t      the  after  a  competitive  test.\t The  actual
\n\t      appointment  will,  however, be  made  by\t the
\n\t      competent authority.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    In order to ascertain the correct scope of the aforesaid
\nparagraphs it is necessary to refer to the entire content of
\nthe  Order.  It\t appears that the U.P.\tPay  Committee\tmade
\ncertain\t recommendations prescribing minimum  qualifications
\nin  respect of employees of Local Bodies. The State  Govern-
\nment  accepted the recommendations of the Pay  Committee  by
\nits Resolution dated March 29, 1949 and in pursuance thereof
\nit  issued  the Government Order dated\t10.4.50\t prescribing
\nminimum\t qualifications\t for the employees of  Local  Bodies
\nmentioned  in the Schedule to the Order which  included\t the
\npost  of  Tax Inspector. Paragraph 2 of the  Order  directed
\nthat  future vacancies on the promotion post will not  ordi-
\nnarily\tbe  given  from a lower to higher  post\t unless\t the
\nofficials  holding  the lower post,  possess  the  requisite
\neducational  qualifications prescribed for the higher  post.
\nParagraph 3 directed that the posts of Head Clerks or Office
\nSuperintendent should be filled by promotion only from among
\nthe educationally qualified Head Clerks. It further directed
\nthat  under  no circumstances the posts of  Head  Clerks  or
\nOffice Suptdt. be filled by direct recruitment from outside.
\nParagraph 4 directed the Municipal Boards to discontinue the
\nposts of Sectional Head Clerks and to create posts of Office
\nHead Clerks. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Order do not  contain
\nany directions
\n207<\/span>
\nwith  regard  to the question of promotion. Paragraph  5  as
\nquoted\tearlier directed that promotion as a rule should  be
\nmade from the lower to the higher post or grade in the\tsame
\nclass  of  service subject to the  directions  contained  in
\nother  paragraphs  of the Order which means subject  to\t the
\nemployee  possessing the minimum  qualifications  prescribed
\nfor the higher post and the higher post should not be filled
\nby transferring employees belonging to other class of  serv-
\nice. Paragraph 6 directed that in case of direct recruitment
\nto  any\t post as specified in the annexure of the  Order  it
\nshould\tbe governed by the educational\tqualifications\tpre-
\nscribed\t in  the  Order and recruitment should\tbe  made  in
\naccordance with the procedure prescribed therein by  consti-
\ntuting\ta committee and inviting applications. Paragraphs  5
\nand 6 as quoted above do not contain any directions  requir-
\ning Municipal Board to fill the post of Tax Inspector exclu-
\nsively\tby  promotion. Though paragraph 3 as  already  noted
\ndirected that under no circumstances the post of Head  Clerk
\nor Office Suptdt. should be filled up by the direct recruit-
\nment  from  outside, no such direction for the post  of\t Tax
\nInspector was issued, therefore it was open to the Municipal
\nBoard  to  make\t appointment to the post  of  Tax  Inspector
\neither by direct recruitment or by promotion.
\n    In\tthe instant case, the Municipal Board, Jaunpur\tgave
\nopportunity to its employees working in the revenue class of
\nservice to appear for selection to the post of Tax Inspector
\nin competition with outsiders. Respondent No. 3 however, did
\nnot  avail  the opportunity for which he himself  is  to  be
\nblamed.\t The Municipal Board, in our opinion,  acted  within
\nits  jurisdiction in making appointment to the pOSt  Of\t Tax
\nInspector  by direct recruitment. The Commissioner, as\twell
\nas the High Court committed error in taking a contrary view.
\nSubsequently,  the Act was amended and the  statutory  rules
\ni.e.,  the U.P. Palika Centralised Service Rules  have\tbeen
\nframed\tregulating  the conditions of service  of  Municipal
\nemployees  and appointment to the post of Tax  Inspector  is
\nregulated by Statutory Rules.\n<\/p>\n
    The High Court committed serious error in upholding\t the
\norder  of the Government dated 13.2.80 in setting aside\t the
\nappellant’s appointment without giving any notice or  oppor-
\ntunity\tto  him. It is an elementary  principle\t of  natural
\njustice that no person should be condemned without  hearing.
\nThe  order  of appointment conferred a vested right  in\t the
\nappellant  to  hold the post of Tax  Inspector,\t that  right
\ncould  not  be taken away without affording  opportunity  of
\nhearing to him. Any order passed in violation of  principles
\nof  natural  justice is rendered void. There is\t no  dispute
\nthat the Commissioner’s Order had
\n208<\/span>
\nbeen passed without affording any opportunity of hearing  to
\nthe appellant therefore the order was illegal and void.\t The
\nHigh Court committed serious error in upholding the  Commis-
\nsioner’s Order setting aside the appellant’s appointment. In
\nthis view, Orders of the High Court and the Commissioner are
\nnot sustainable in law.\n<\/p>\n
    We accordingly, allow the appeal and set aside the Order
\nof the High Court as well as the Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n
       There will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
T.N.A.\t\t\t\t\t\t      Appeal\nallowed.\n209<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 307, 1989 SCR Supl. (2) 201 Author: K Singh Bench: Singh, K.N. (J) PETITIONER: SHRIDHAR SON OF RAM DULAR Vs. RESPONDENT: NAGAR PALIKA, JAUNPUR AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT17\/11\/1989 BENCH: SINGH, K.N. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155974","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nShridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - 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\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\" \/>\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=\"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-08T18:04:45+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989\",\"datePublished\":\"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-08T18:04:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\"},\"wordCount\":2093,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\",\"name\":\"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-08T18:04:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989\"}]},{\"@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":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - 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\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-08T18:04:45+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989","datePublished":"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-08T18:04:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2"},"wordCount":2093,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2","name":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1989-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-08T18:04:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shridhar-son-of-ram-dular-vs-nagar-palika-jaunpur-and-ors-on-17-november-1989-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shridhar Son Of Ram Dular vs Nagar Palika, Jaunpur And Ors on 17 November, 1989"}]},{"@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\/155974","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=155974"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155974\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=155974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=155974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=155974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}