{"id":183314,"date":"2010-03-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010"},"modified":"2016-09-08T10:05:32","modified_gmt":"2016-09-08T04:35:32","slug":"sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Patna High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S.K.Katriar<\/div>\n<pre>            CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.6123 OF 2004\n                                *******\n<\/pre>\n<p>         In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the<br \/>\n         Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                *******<\/p>\n<p>         SARITA KASHYAP @ KUMARI SARITA KASHYAP,<br \/>\n         daughter of late Gopal Prasad Mahtha, C\/o Shri Mukul Prasad,<br \/>\n         resident of Mohalla- Hamidganj, near Pathar Ki Masjid, P.O.<br \/>\n         Daltanganj, District Palamoun.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                          &#8230;.. Petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                   Versus\n<\/p>\n<p>         1. Secretary to the Govt. of India, Department of Telecom -cum-\n<\/p>\n<p>              Director General Department of Telecom &#8220;Sanchar Bhawan&#8221;<br \/>\n              New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n<p>         2. Chief General Manager, Department of Telecommunication,<br \/>\n              Patna.\n<\/p>\n<p>         3. The Registrar, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna<br \/>\n              Bench, Patna.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                      &#8230;&#8230;..Respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                    *******<br \/>\n         For the Petitioner: `      Mr. Vishnudeo Narayan, Advocate.<\/p>\n<p>         For the Respondents :     Mr. Jawahar Prasad Katna,<br \/>\n                                       Sr. Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>                              *******<\/p>\n<p>                                 PRESENT<\/p>\n<p>          THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR<\/p>\n<p>         THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL<br \/>\n                            *********<\/p>\n<p>S K Katriar &amp;<br \/>\nKishore K. Mandal, JJ.       This writ petition is directed against the following<\/p>\n<p>         orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench,<\/p>\n<p>         Patna:\n<\/p>\n<p>            (i)   Order dated 12.10.2000, passed in O.A. No.411 of 1997<\/p>\n<p>                  (Kumari Sarita Kashyap Vs. Secretary to Government<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                           2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>            of India and another), whereby the original application<\/p>\n<p>            has been rejected, and upheld the decision of the<\/p>\n<p>            respondent authorities declining appointment of the<\/p>\n<p>            petitioner on compassionate ground,<\/p>\n<p>     (ii)   Order dated 22.3.2004, passed in R.A. No.4 of 2001 (R)<\/p>\n<p>            (Kumari Sarita Kashyap Vs. The Union of India and<\/p>\n<p>            others), whereby the review application has been<\/p>\n<p>            rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.               According to the writ petition, One Gopal Prasad Mahtha<\/p>\n<p>was engaged by the Department of Telecommunication as daily-rated<\/p>\n<p>employee with effect from 7.8.1977. His services were regularised with<\/p>\n<p>effect from 1.1.1989. He met with an accident on 1.12.1991. He<\/p>\n<p>submitted an application on 10.2.1992, for petitioner\u201fs appointment on<\/p>\n<p>compassionate ground. The respondent authorities sent their reply dated<\/p>\n<p>26.2.1992 (Annexure-6), to the employee calling upon to furnish proof<\/p>\n<p>of adoption of the petitioner. In the meantime, the authorities constituted<\/p>\n<p>a Medical Board. The employee appeared before the medical board on<\/p>\n<p>14.2.1992, which submitted its report dated 26.2.1992 (Annexure-4),<\/p>\n<p>and declared him handicapped to the extent of 25%. A second Medical<\/p>\n<p>Board was also constituted which submitted its report dated 9.4.1993<\/p>\n<p>(Annexure-5), which stated that the employee incapacity was not<\/p>\n<p>complete, and not of a permanent nature. The Medical Board was,<\/p>\n<p>therefore, of the view that the employee can be continued in service of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                           3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;less laborious character than that which he had been doing&#8230;.&#8221;. The<\/p>\n<p>employee, therefore, continued to function. The respondent authorities<\/p>\n<p>issued order dated 30.7.1993 (Annexure-9), whereby the employee was<\/p>\n<p>granted invalid retirement with effect from 10.7.1993. He would have<\/p>\n<p>reached the age of superannuation on completion of sixty years of age<\/p>\n<p>on 31.7.1993. He died on 5.9.1993. In view of the position that the<\/p>\n<p>respondent authorities did not accede to the employee\u201fs request for<\/p>\n<p>petitioner\u201fs appointment on compassionate ground, she moved the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal by preferring O.A. No.411 of 1997. The petitioner set up her<\/p>\n<p>claim for compassionate appointment on the ground that she is validly<\/p>\n<p>adopted daughter of the employee, and he had been incapacitated by the<\/p>\n<p>accident. The same has been rejected by the impugned order. The<\/p>\n<p>petitioner thereafter filed review application which has also been<\/p>\n<p>rejected by the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.             We have perused the materials on record and considered<\/p>\n<p>the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The most vital aspect<\/p>\n<p>of the matter appears to us is that there was neither any evidence before<\/p>\n<p>the authorities, nor before the Tribunal, nor before us, that the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>was the validly adopted daughter of the employee. Indeed the employee<\/p>\n<p>seems to have submitted his application dated 10.2.1992, requesting the<\/p>\n<p>department to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground. The<\/p>\n<p>respondent authorities promptly replied by communication dated<\/p>\n<p>26.2.1992 (Annexure-6), calling upon the employee to furnish proof of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                          4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>adoption. No material has been brought to the notice of the Tribunal that<\/p>\n<p>she was validly adopted daughter of the employee. The petitioner has<\/p>\n<p>placed before us photo copy of an affidavit alleged to have been sworn<\/p>\n<p>by the employee on 28.7.1993, wherein he stated that he has all through<\/p>\n<p>remained unmarried. He adopted the petitioner, who is the daughter of<\/p>\n<p>his full sister, as his own daughter. We do not find it possible to place<\/p>\n<p>reliance on the affidavit. The employee did not submit any proof of<\/p>\n<p>adoption when he was called upon to do so. No such proof was placed<\/p>\n<p>before the Tribunal. The affidavit has been placed for the first time in<\/p>\n<p>the present proceeding, and is dated 28.7.1993, sworn about six weeks<\/p>\n<p>prior to his death. It appears to be a got-up document for the purpose of<\/p>\n<p>the present proceeding. Furthermore, this is not a forum of facts. It<\/p>\n<p>should have been left to the authorities in the first instance, and may be<\/p>\n<p>by way of appeal before the Tribunal, to determine the issue of fact<\/p>\n<p>whether or not the petitioner was a validly adopted daughter of the<\/p>\n<p>employee. In that view of the matter, the very basis of the petitioner\u201fs<\/p>\n<p>claim for appointment on compassionate ground in the capacity of a<\/p>\n<p>validly adopted daughter of the employee is absent.<\/p>\n<p>4.             The second aspect of the matter is equally important and<\/p>\n<p>operates against the petitioner. The employee seems to have met with an<\/p>\n<p>accident on 1.12.1991, and the materials on record do not suggest that it<\/p>\n<p>was of a grave nature. Both the medical reports on record show that he<\/p>\n<p>had suffered injury to the extent of 25%, and he may be allowed to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                          5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>continue in service but with less arduous task than he was engaged on<\/p>\n<p>the date of the accident. Furthermore, the employee seems to have<\/p>\n<p>continued in harness up to 30th of July 1993, the date on which the<\/p>\n<p>authorities issued the order granting invalid retirement to the employee.<\/p>\n<p>He was thus left only one day before his superannuation. Learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the petitioner relied on Clause (1) of Appendix-2 of the<\/p>\n<p>Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, O.M.<\/p>\n<p>No.14014\/6\/86-Estt. (D), dated the 30th June, 1987, and is reproduced<\/p>\n<p>hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>        1. To whom applicable:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        (a)   To a son or daughter or near relative of a<br \/>\n              Government servant who dies in harness<br \/>\n              including death by which leaving his family in<br \/>\n              immediate need of assistance when there is no<br \/>\n              other earning member in the family.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        (b) In exceptional cases when a Department is<br \/>\n            satisfied that the condition of the family is<br \/>\n            indigent and is in great distress, the benefit of<br \/>\n            compassionate appointment may be extended to<br \/>\n            a son\/daughter\/near relative of a Government<br \/>\n            servant retired on medical grounds under Rule<br \/>\n            18 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules<br \/>\n            1972 or corresponding provisions in the Central<br \/>\n            Civil Service Regulations before attaining the<br \/>\n            age of 55 years. In case of Group \u201eD\u201femployee<br \/>\n            whose normal age of superannuation is 60 years,<br \/>\n            compassionate appointment may be considered<br \/>\n            where they are retired on medical grounds before<br \/>\n            attaining the age of 57 years.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        (c)   To a son or daughter or near relative of a<br \/>\n              Government who dies during the period of<br \/>\n              extension in service but not re-employment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     6<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                    Clause (1) is obviously inapplicable to the facts and<\/p>\n<p>           circumstances of the case and indeed reliance has not been placed on<\/p>\n<p>           clause 1(a). The petitioner has really placed reliance on Clause (b) that,<\/p>\n<p>           in exceptional cases, appointment on compassionate ground can be<\/p>\n<p>           made provided the cause of action for the same on medical ground had<\/p>\n<p>           taken place before the employee reached 57 years of age. In the present<\/p>\n<p>           case, the employee had retired on medical ground one day, or at best<\/p>\n<p>           twenty days, prior to the date he would have reached his age of<\/p>\n<p>           superannuation. The petitioner\u201fs case does not fall under this clause.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>           5.              In the result, there is no merit in this case. The writ<\/p>\n<p>           petition is dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no<\/p>\n<p>           order as to costs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                                                       (S K Katriar, J.)<\/p>\n<p>                                                   (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)<\/p>\n<p>Patna High Court, Patna<br \/>\nDated the 8th day of March, 2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>S.K.Pathak\/ (NAFR)\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Patna High Court Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 Author: S.K.Katriar CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.6123 OF 2004 ******* In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ******* SARITA KASHYAP @ KUMARI SARITA KASHYAP, daughter of late Gopal Prasad Mahtha, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-183314","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - 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\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-08T04:35:32+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-08T04:35:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1315,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-08T04:35:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - 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\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-08T04:35:32+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-08T04:35:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010"},"wordCount":1315,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010","name":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-08T04:35:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarita-kashyap-kumari-sarita-vs-secretary-to-the-govt-of-india-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sarita Kashyap @ Kumari Sarita vs Secretary To The Govt.Of India on 8 March, 2010"}]},{"@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\/183314","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=183314"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183314\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=183314"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=183314"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=183314"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}