{"id":191343,"date":"2010-02-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010"},"modified":"2016-05-15T10:27:36","modified_gmt":"2016-05-15T04:57:36","slug":"pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n
Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010<\/div>\n
                                                                                 AFR\n                                                                              Court No.3\n\n\n                    Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 48415 of 2007\n\nPradeep Kumar Garg                         ...........                  Petitioner\n                                           Versus\nState of U.P. and others                   ............                 Respondents<\/pre>\n
                                           Present:\n<\/p>\n
    (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitava Lala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N.H.Zaidi)<\/p>\n
                                     Appearance:\n<\/p>\n
             Counsel for the petitioner             :     Sri Anoop Trivedi\n\n             Counsel for the respondents            :     Sri Ved Byas Misra\n                                                          and Standing Counsel\n\nAmitava Lala,J.:       This writ petition has been filed praying inter alia :\n<\/pre>\n
             “(i)   issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
\n             quashing the order dt. 26.6.2007 passed by the
\n             Assistant Engineer, GDA to the extent the same has
\n             required the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs.\n<\/p>\n
             54,57,946\/0 towards the external development charge,
\n             Rs. 38,312\/- towards the inspection charges and bank
\n             guarantee of Rs. 18,50,603\/- towards the internal
\n             development charges.\n<\/p>\n
             (ii)      issue an appropriate writ, order or direction
\n             commanding the respondent development authority to
\n             charge the external development fee in strict
\n             consonance with the Government order dt. 29.12.2005
\n             i.e. at the rate of Rs. 400\/- per squire meter.\n<\/p>\n
             (iii) issue any other and further, writ order a direction
\n             which this Hon’ble Court may issue fit and proper in this
\n             circumstances of the cases.\n<\/p>\n
             (iv)     Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.”\n<\/p>\n
      Mr. Anoop Trivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has
\ncontended before us that the petitioner’s case is that the concerned Chairman or
\nVice-Chairman of the Ghaziabad Development Authority (hereinafter called as the
\nGDA) has no jurisdiction to impose or levy the development charges in the manner
\nas it has been done. Secondly, there can not be any distinction between internal
\nand external charges. Thirdly, the amount of charges are exorbitant in nature.
\nLastly, the principle of quid pro quo is applicable in this case. For an example, he
\nhas shown before us a tariff schedule made by the State Government for the city of
\n                                                                                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
Lucknow.     However, Mr. Ved Byas Misra joined the issue by saying that the
\nexceptional clause does not speak that the same is made for the entire State
\nbased on tariff data of Lucknow city. He says that as per the exceptional clause
\nother development authority can charge differently.\n<\/p>\n
       In effect, the plinth of argument of Mr. Trivedi is based on the Constitution
\nBench Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (2006) 7 SCC 241 (Jindal
\nStainless Ltd. (2) And Another Vs. State of Haryana And Others). He has
\ndrawn our attention to various paragraphs of the judgment to establish before us
\nthat the concept of compensatory tax is not there in the Constitution but is judicially
\nevolved in the case of Automobile Transport (Rajasthan) Ltd. Vs. State of
\nRajsthan reported in (1963) 1 SCR 491: AIR 1962 SC 1406 as a part of regulatory
\ncharge. Therefore, there is difference between payment of tax and fee or charge
\nleviable on the basis of the service. The fee or charge is based on the “principle of
\nequivalence”.    The main basis of the fee or charge is quantifiable and measurable
\nbenefit, which is based on quantifiable data. It has to be paid for the value.
\nEvery benefit is measured in terms of cost, which has to be reimbursed in the form
\nof compensatory tax.       In other words, compensatory tax is a recompense \/
\nreimbursement. It is not for revenue but as reimbursement\/recompense to the
\nservice\/facility provider. It is more closer to fees than to tax.\n<\/p>\n
       Mr. Misra has contended before us that the authority is not powerless in
\nimposing development fee, be it external or internal. He has drawn our attention to
\nSection 59 (1) (c) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning And Development Act, 1973
\n(hereinafter called as Act, 1973) which provides that without prejudice to the
\ngenerality of the provisions of clauses (a) and (b), any bye-laws, directions or
\nregulations under the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 or the Uttar Pradesh
\n(Regulation of Building Operations) Act, 1958 (hereinafter called as the Act, 1958)
\nor the Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1959, as the case may be and in
\nforce on the date immediately before the date of commencement of this Act, shall,
\nin so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, continue in
\nforce until altered, repealed or amended by any Competent Authority under this
\nAct.   He has also drawn our attention to the U.P. (Regulation of Building
\nOperations) Regulations, 1960 framed under the Act, 1958 to show us what is the
\nimport and meaning of internal development.          Regulation 5 (2) (i) speaks    for
\nexternal and internal development, therefore, the same is set out hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
              “(2) An application for permission to develop an area of
\n              land as a colony may be granted subject, as may be, to
\n                                                                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
             the following conditions–\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (i) he enters into an agreement with the local body
\n             concerned for such internal development of the land and
\n             external development in connection therewith to the
\n             satisfaction of the Prescribed Authority as the Controlling
\n             Authority may require.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Explanation 1.–The internal development of the
\n             land includes–\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (a) levelling of land,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (b) roads,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (c) stream water drains,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (d) street lighting,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (e) water supply,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (f) provision of open spaces for parks, playgrounds and
\n             the like,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (g) sewerage;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (h) earmarking and leaving out open site for schools
\n             dispensaries, community centres and other public utility
\n             services.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Explanation II. –The external development means
\n             the works, within or beyond the limits of the colony,
\n             required to be done for the satisfactory completion and
\n             functioning of any of the items of internal development of
\n             the colony.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      According to him, if the Act, 1973 is silent on that score, the authority
\nconcerned can impose fees or charges under such regulation irrespective of the
\nfactum that the same is product of the Act, 1958.\n<\/p>\n
      However,we have gone through the definition of the “development fee” as
\ndefined under Section 2(ggg) of the Act, 1973, which has been inserted by Section
\n2 of the U.P. Act 3 of 1997. The definition is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
             “2(ggg) “development fee” means the fee levied upon a
\n             person or body under Section 15 for construction of road,
\n             drain,sewer line, electric supply and water-supply lines in
\n             the development area by the Development Authority.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Therefore, we find that the nature of the development fee inserted therein is
\nmore or less similar to the internal development as made under the Regulation in
\nthe Act, 1958. Hence, it is crystal clear that the form of development fee has been
\nconsolidated making it one under the definition of Section 2(ggg) of the Act, 1973.
\nWe also find from Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act, 1904 that
\nwhere any enactment is repealed and re-enacted by an Uttar Pradesh Act, with or
\n                                                                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
without modification, then, unless it is otherwise expressly provided, any
\nappointment, or statutory instrument or form made or issued under the repealed
\nenactment, shall, so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions re-enacted,
\ncontinue in force, and be deemed to have been made or issued under the
\nprovisions so re-enacted, unless and until it is superseded by any appointment or
\nstatutory instrument or form made or issued under the provisions so re-enacted.\n<\/p>\n
      Mr. Trivedi upon joining the issue has contended that the word inconsistent
\nitself is damaging to the respondents because the definition of internal
\ndevelopment as given in Regulation 5 (2) (1) of the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of
\nBuilding Operations) Regulations, 1960 is inconsistent with the Act, 1973. Apart
\nfrom this issue, the other important feature, which we have found out from Section
\n15, specially sub-section (2-A) of Act, 1973, which has been inserted by Section 3
\nof U.P. Act 3 of 1997, it appears to us that the Authority can levy development fee
\nin such manner and at such rate as prescribed by rules. Part of the Section 15 sub-
\nsection (2-A) is inserted hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
              “(2-A) The Authority shall be entitled to levy
\n              development fees, mutation charges, stacking fees and
\n              water fees in such manner and at such rates as may
\n              be prescribed.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Since under clause (33-A) of Section 4 of the Uttar Pradesh General
\nClauses Act, 1904 “prescribed” means prescribed by rules made under the Act in
\nwhich the word occurs, therefore, we have called upon Mr. Misra to give answer
\nwhether or not any such rule has been framed by the State under Act, 1973
\nbecause in the absence of such rules, it will be the domain of the administration to
\nput their thumb in respect of any claim against any of the people which will create a
\nlot of discrimination in respect of anybody and it will be floodgate of litigation before
\nthe Court. We cannot encourage the same. Therefore, when there is no such rule,
\nthe authorities concerned are not debarred from insisting the State to make the
\nrules and in case the same has not been made out, the tariff schedule which has
\nbeen forwarded by the State may be followed as far as practicable. Therefore, if we
\nstrictly go by sub-section (2-A) of Section 15 of Act, 1973, the levy of fees can only
\nbe levied in such manner and at such rate, as may be permitted by rules not
\notherwise and in absence of such rule, no power is vested with the authorities
\nconcerned to impose external development charges or may give direction for filing
\nBank guarantee towards the internal development charges and making the
\ndistinction between internal and external development charges. Having so, we can
\n                                                                               5<\/span><\/p>\n
not justifiably allow the impugned order dated 26th June, 2007 passed by the
\nAssistant Engineer       of the G.D.A. to go on, which is quashed and the
\nconsequences will be followed. We send the matter to the Principal Secretary,
\nUrban Planning and Development Department, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow for the
\npurpose of due consideration of the cause within a period of two months from the
\ndate of communication of this order.\n<\/p>\n
      Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.\n<\/p>\n
      No order is passed as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                                         (Justice Amitava Lala)
\n      I agree.\n<\/p>\n
 (Justice S.N.H.Zaidi)<\/p>\n
Dt.\/- 04.02.2010
\nMAA\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                              6<\/span><\/p>\n
Hon’ble Amitava Lala,J.\n<\/p>\n
Hon’ble S.N.H.Zaidi,J.\n<\/p>\n
      The writ petition is disposed of
\nwithout imposing any cost.\n<\/p>\n
Dt.04.02.2010
\nMAA\/-\n<\/p>\n
      For orders, see order of date passed
\non separate sheets (five pages).\n<\/p>\n
Dt. 04.02.2010
\nMAA\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 AFR Court No.3 Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 48415 of 2007 Pradeep Kumar Garg ……….. Petitioner Versus State of U.P. and others ………… Respondents Present: (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitava Lala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N.H.Zaidi) Appearance: Counsel for the […]<\/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":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-191343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - 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\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-15T04:57:36+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\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-15T04:57:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1626,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-15T04:57:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 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":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - 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\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-15T04:57:36+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\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-15T04:57:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010"},"wordCount":1626,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010","name":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-15T04:57:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pradeep-kumar-garg-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-4-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pradeep Kumar Garg vs State Of U.P. & Others on 4 February, 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\/191343","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=191343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191343\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=191343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=191343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=191343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}