{"id":166912,"date":"2002-08-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-08-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002"},"modified":"2018-11-20T05:35:39","modified_gmt":"2018-11-20T00:05:39","slug":"university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","title":{"rendered":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>A.K. Sikri, J.  <\/p>\n<p>1. This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the appellant, i.e., University Grants Commission (UGC) against the order dated 15th January, 2002 passed by learned Single Judge in CWP No. 434\/99.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. CWP No. 434\/99 was filed by the Peons employed<br \/>\nby the UGC on adhoc basis. Earlier some<br \/>\nLDCs working on adhoc basis in UGC had also filed CWP<br \/>\nNo. 1298\/99. In the said CWP the UGC filed counter affidavit        to        the   effect   that   it   had  undertaken        to give preference     to  the  said  LDCs\/petitioners   in     that writ petition     for   filling  up  of   the  posts   on     regular basis against        the       existing     vacancies     as   well   as vacancies which may arise in future. When CWP No. 434\/99 came up for hearing on 15th January, 2002 the learned counsel for the UGC made a statement before the learned Single Judge that the decision taken in respect of the LDCs would apply in the case of the Peons as well. Recording that statement, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. However, it may be stated at this stage that during the pendency of the aforesaid CWP No. 434\/99 the learned Single Judge had passed an interim order dated 25th January, 1999 directing the UGC not to disengage the petitioners\/Peons. The UGC had filed an<br \/>\napplication for vacating the said ex-parte ad interim<br \/>\norder dated 25th January, 1999. While this application<br \/>\nwas pending the UGC filed another application being CM<br \/>\nNo. 5570\/2001 in which it al1eged that performance of<br \/>\npetitioners 1 and 4 was unsatisfactory and they were<br \/>\ndeliberately not performing the duties allotted to<br \/>\nthem. They were taking undue advantage of ad interim<br \/>\norder dated 25th January, 1999 and engaging themselves<br \/>\nin the acts of insubordination. It was, thus, stated<br \/>\nin the said application that the reason for disengaging<br \/>\nthe petitioners 1 and 4 was not that they were working<br \/>\non adhoc basis but their unsatisfactory work and<br \/>\ninsubordination. It was further stated in para 10 of<br \/>\nthe application as under:\n<\/p>\n<p> &#8220;It may be stated that in so far as<br \/>\nPetitioner Nos. 2-3 and 5-9 are<br \/>\nconcerned, they are being allowed to<br \/>\ncontinue to work in term of this Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\ncourt order dated 25th January, 1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>However, the Answering respondent<br \/>\nrespectfully seeks variation of the said<br \/>\norder qua petitioner Nos. 1 and 4 and<br \/>\nseeks to discontinue their services as<br \/>\nthey have indulged in acts of<br \/>\nindiscipline and insubordination and have<br \/>\nvitiated the working atmosphere. It is<br \/>\nmost respectfully stated that the said<br \/>\npetitioners ought not to be all owed to<br \/>\ntake advantage of the interim order dated<br \/>\n25th January, 1999 and 19th October, 2000<br \/>\nto continue to work without any<br \/>\naccountability to their superiors.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4. On the basis of aforesaid averments in the application, the prayer made in the application was for variation of ex-parte order dated 25th January, 1999 to the extent that the services of the petitioners 1 and 4 in the said writ petition be permitted to discontinue.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. On 15th January, 2002 while disposing of the writ petition in the manner stated above, the learned Single Judge passed the following order on CM No. 5570\/2001:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8221; CM   5570\/2001:\n<\/p>\n<p>The procedure which has to be followed in terms of the undertaking given by the Respondents, aforesaid will also be applicable to the petitioner and in view thereof, the relief claimed for by respondent No. 2 in this application cannot be granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>Application  is  dismissed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6.      In     the   present   appeal,   the  main  grievance     of the     UGC     is     to     the     aforesaid     order     passed     in     CM No. 5570\/2001. As far as order in the writ petition is concerned, the learned counsel for the UGC did not press the appeal nor it could be done as the said order in the writ petition is based on concession of the UGC itself, and therefore, it could not file any such appeal. In these circumstances, while admitting the appeal on 30th May, 2002 it was clarified that the said appeal was admitted only in respect of order passed in CM No. 5570\/2001.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. When the matter came up for hearing, after notice, on 26th July, 2002 nobody appeared on behalf of the UGC. We heard Ms. Aarti Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondents who assisted us in perusing the records of the case as well.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. After hearing the learned counsel for the respondents and perusing the records, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge was not correct in dismissing the CM No. 5570\/2001 only because of the statement\/undertaking given by the UGC regarding regularisation of these Peons. As is clear from the narration of facts stated above, the prayer in this CM was entirely different. The UGC had sought variation of the ex-parte order dated 25th January, 1999 on the ground that in so far as petitioners 1 and 4 were concerned, they were not entitled to any regularisation and their services had to be disengaged because of unsatisfactory performance and insubordination. Even if the UGC took a policy decision and framed a scheme of regularisation for adhoc LDCs\/Peons, as an employer\/ it has right not to consider those adhoc Peons for regularisation whose services are not otherwise satisfactory or who have indulged in acts of insubordination.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. This aspect of the matter was not at all considered and presumably the CM No. 5570\/2001 was dismissed only under the impression that it was an application for vacation of ex-parte order which did not survive after the aforesaid orders passed in writ petition based on the concession of the UGC.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.   In   these   circumstances,   we  set   aside   the  order of     the     learned   single   Judge   so   far   it   relates     to     CM No. 5570\/2001 and clarify that the<br \/>\nconcession\/undertaking given by the UGC would not be<br \/>\napplicable in the cases of petitioners 1 and 4 in the<br \/>\nwrit petition (respondents 1 and 4 herein). Since the<br \/>\nUGC has level led allegations of indiscipline and<br \/>\ninsubordination vitiating the working atmosphere in the<br \/>\nUGC, it would be necessary for the UGC to take any action      after   serving   show   cause   notices   to   these   Peons and giving them opportunity of being heard in consonance with the principles of natural justice. We are conscious of the fact that these Peons are working only as adhoc employees, and therefore, it would not be necessary to hold a full-fledged departmental enquiry. However still, because of the peculiar facts of this case when the UGC has decided to regularise other Peons for which Scheme is framed by it and it wants to deprive these two Peons to get this benefit, we are of the opinion that principles of natural justice would demand that at least opportunity of being heard should be given to these Peons when the UGC does not want to extend the benefit of consideration of their cases for regularisation which benefit it has agreed to bestow on other similarly situated persons. Keeping in view these facts, we have taken this view that at least show cause notice is required to be served upon these adhoc employees who are entitled to be heard before any ction is taken.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. Ms. Aarti Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents pointed out that inspite of ex-parte stay order, these Peons were disengaged from services and were not taken back.\n<\/p>\n<p>12. The effect of the aforesaid order coupled with the fact that there was an interim order operating qua all the petitioners in the writ petition, the respondents 1 and 4 herein would also be deemed to be in service till action is taken against them after following the aforesaid procedure. It goes without saying that if any action adverse to these two employees is taken, they shall be at liberty to approach appropriate court of law challenging the said action.\n<\/p>\n<pre>13.       The     appeal      is  disposed   of   in     the     aforesaid terms.\n \n\nThere   shall   be  no   order   as   to   costs.\n \n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 Author: A Sikri Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the appellant, i.e., University Grants Commission (UGC) against the order dated 15th January, 2002 passed by learned Single Judge in [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-166912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-20T00:05:39+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\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-20T00:05:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1277,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\",\"name\":\"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-20T00:05:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-20T00:05:39+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\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002","datePublished":"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-20T00:05:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002"},"wordCount":1277,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002","name":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-20T00:05:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/university-grants-commission-vs-sh-dinanath-and-ors-on-8-august-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"University Grants Commission vs Sh. Dinanath And Ors. on 8 August, 2002"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166912","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=166912"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166912\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}