{"id":197842,"date":"2009-03-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009"},"modified":"2016-07-07T11:12:45","modified_gmt":"2016-07-07T05:42:45","slug":"shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                              .....\n<\/pre>\n<p>                                      F.No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2008\/01463<br \/>\n                                      Dated, the 09th March, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<p> Appellant       : Shri U.R.M. Raju<\/p>\n<p> Respondents : Visakhapatnam Port Trust<\/p>\n<p>       This matter came up for hearing on 02.03.2009 pursuant to Commission&#8217;s<br \/>\nnotice dated 30.01.2009. Appellant was absent when called. Respondents were<br \/>\nrepresented by Shri T. Venu Gopal, Personnel Officer.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.     Appellant&#8217;s RTI-application dated 18.06.2008 contained the following<br \/>\nqueries:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;1)    Copies of applications received for the post of Dy CVO, in<br \/>\n              response to the advertisement issued on 7-12-07.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        2)    Copy of the office note processed from 7-12-2007 to till 16-6-08,<br \/>\n              on the above subject\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        3)    Copy of the scrutiny committee recommendations in the above<br \/>\n              subject,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        4)    Copies of the call letters sent to the candidates (excluding my call<br \/>\n              letter),\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        5)    Copies of note file processed on the selection committee<br \/>\n              constitution,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        6)    Copy of CVO \/ VPT&#8217;s letter in the above matter, if any,\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>        7)    Copy of the result of the selection conducted on 14-6-08 (excluding<br \/>\n              the marks statements)&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>3.    These were replied to by the CPIO on 04.07.2008 and the first-appeal was<br \/>\ndecided by the Appellate Authority on 02.09.2008. Thereafter, appellant moved<br \/>\nthe Commission in second-appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.     Respondents&#8217; plea in defence of not providing the information to the<br \/>\nappellant is generally focused on the fact that the recruitment processes in the<br \/>\nmatter of appointment of Deputy Chief Vigilance Officer regarding to which this<br \/>\ninformation pertains, was still not completed and disclosing the information now<br \/>\nshall be premature and contrary to public interest. It is the respondents&#8217;<br \/>\ncontention that disclosure of any information about an ongoing recruitment<br \/>\nprocess of a key official of the public authority, is not in public interest because<br \/>\npremature disclosures complicate the recruitment process through intrusive<\/p>\n<p>AT-09032009-15.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         Page 1 of 3<\/span><br \/>\n actions of interested parties and expose those who are involved in this process to<br \/>\nwholly avoidable pressures and even intimidations.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.     Appellant, in his written-submission, has stated that the reasons quoted by<br \/>\nPIO and the Appellate Authority were flimsy, irrelevant and against the<br \/>\nprovisions of RTI Act. He has contended that no information was fiduciary in<br \/>\nnature to warrant its non-disclosure. He has asserted that, what he is seeking is<br \/>\ndisclosure of information and not any redressal of grievance.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.     The position taken by the respondents is in conformity with Section 124<br \/>\nof the Indian Evidence Act, which states &#8220;no public officer shall be compelled to<br \/>\ndisclose communications made to him in official confidence, when he considers<br \/>\nthat the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>7.      Respondents&#8217; case is that the file to which appellant has attempted to gain<br \/>\naccess through the RTI Act contains several communications from different<br \/>\nsources, public authorities and public servants having a bearing on the current<br \/>\nprocess of recruitment of Deputy Chief Vigilance Officer of the Visakhapatnam<br \/>\nPort Trust (VPT). The entire correspondence has been done confidentially in<br \/>\norder to guard its integrity. The sole judge as to whether disclosure will harm<br \/>\npublic interest is the public authority concerned. That decision by the public<br \/>\nauthority has been made, i.e. to maintain confidentiality of the process and the<br \/>\nfile in which that process is extant.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.     If information regarding current recruitment processes is authorized to be<br \/>\ndisclosed even before such a process is completed, it is possible that it would<br \/>\npave the way for wholly absurd claims for disclosures. For example, a petitioner<br \/>\nmay, citing precedent, demand information regarding various aspects of a<br \/>\nrecruitment process undertaken by the Public Service Commissions and, such<br \/>\nother recruitment bodies, even before such a process is completed and thereby<br \/>\nthrow the entire process into disarray. No public interest shall be served by such<br \/>\ndisclosures. On the contrary, such premature disclosures shall have a deleterious<br \/>\nimpact on public interest and will serve no public purpose.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.     In the context of the above, the application of this appellant needs to be<br \/>\nexamined in terms of Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. The information, which the<br \/>\nappellant seeks to access, is admittedly held confidential by the public authority<br \/>\n\u23af VPT. In their judgement disclosure of this information would irreversibly<br \/>\ndamage the ongoing recruitment process and compromise fair and objective<br \/>\ndecision-making by the competent authority. This, according to them, is the<br \/>\nreason why the requested information should not be authorized to be disclosed<br \/>\nwithin the provision of Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. Their argument is<br \/>\nsupported by the provisions of Section 124 of the Indian Evidence Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>AT-09032009-15.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                        Page 2 of 3<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p> 10.    In view of what has been stated above, I&#8217;m in agreement with the<br \/>\nrespondents that regardless of whether the requested information is in itself<br \/>\ndisclosable, it should not be allowed to be disclosed at this point in time when the<br \/>\nrecruitment process is still current and the final decision has not been made. In<br \/>\nmy view, disclosing this information shall be contrary to public interest as<br \/>\nmentioned in Section 124 of the Indian Evidence Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.    In view of the above, I&#8217;m not willing to authorize disclosure of this<br \/>\ninformation at this point in time. However, should the appellant so wish, he can<br \/>\nseek the same set of information after the decision in this recruitment process has<br \/>\nbeen made, through another RTI-application before the CPIO. For now, no<br \/>\ndisclosure of information as requested can be authorized.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.    Appeal disallowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.    Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                           ( A.N. TIWARI )<br \/>\n                                              INFORMATION COMMISSIONER<\/p>\n<p>AT-09032009-15.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         Page 3 of 3<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION &#8230;.. F.No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2008\/01463 Dated, the 09th March, 2009. Appellant : Shri U.R.M. Raju Respondents : Visakhapatnam Port Trust This matter came up for hearing on 02.03.2009 pursuant to Commission&#8217;s notice dated 30.01.2009. Appellant was absent when called. Respondents were [&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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-197842","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - 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\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-07T05:42:45+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-07T05:42:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":897,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-07T05:42:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - 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\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-07T05:42:45+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-07T05:42:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009"},"wordCount":897,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009","name":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-07T05:42:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-u-r-m-raju-vs-visakhapatnam-port-trust-on-9-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri U.R.M. Raju vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust on 9 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197842","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=197842"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197842\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197842"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=197842"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=197842"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}