{"id":198116,"date":"2009-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-01-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009"},"modified":"2019-04-09T23:47:39","modified_gmt":"2019-04-09T18:17:39","slug":"the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>C.R. No. 5873 of 2007                                           [1]\n\n                IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                         AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                             Civil Revision No. 5873 of 2007 (O&amp;M)\n                             Date of decision: January 16, 2009\n\nThe Secretary, Housing and Urban Development,\nPunjab and others\n                                                                 .. Petitioners\n       v.\n\nSukhwinder Singh\n                                                                 .. Respondent\n\n\nCORAM:         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL\n\nPresent:       Mr. B.B.S. Teji, Advocate for the petitioners.\n\n               Mr. Vivek Rattan, Advocate for the respondent.\n                                  ...\n<\/pre>\n<p>Rajesh Bindal J.\n<\/p>\n<p>               Challenge in the present petition is to the order, passed by the learned<br \/>\ncourt below, whereby the application filed by the petitioners for condonation of<br \/>\ndelay of 488 days in filing the appeal was dismissed and consequently the appeal<br \/>\nas well.\n<\/p>\n<p>               Briefly, the facts are that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for<br \/>\ndeclaration to the effect that he was entitled to fixation of pay as re-employed ex-<br \/>\nserviceman in terms of the rules and instructions issued for the purpose. The suit<br \/>\nwas decreed on 18.2.2005 by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar.<br \/>\nAppeal along with an application for condonation of delay of 488 days was filed<br \/>\nby the petitioners before the learned appellate court on 31.7.2006 with the plea<br \/>\nthat file of the case remained pending at various levels in the government set up<br \/>\nwhere sometimes, opinion was that the case was fit for filing appeal, whereas<br \/>\nsometimes it was that the case was not fit for filing the appeal, hence the delay<br \/>\noccurred. However, the cause shown by the petitioners was not found to be<br \/>\nsufficient. Accordingly, learned appellate court dismissed the application and<br \/>\nconsequently the appeal as well. It is this order which is impugned in the present<br \/>\npetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>               Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the government<br \/>\nfunctioning and bureaucratic set up, the files move at snail&#8217;s speed. The attitude of<br \/>\nthe officers\/officials dealing with the file is totally impersonal and as has been<br \/>\nexplained in the application filed before the learned court below, the file was dealt<br \/>\n C.R. No. 5873 of 2007                                        [2]<\/p>\n<p>with at various levels where in the process, the delay occurred. The technicalities<br \/>\nshould give way to the substantial justice and the appeal filed by the petitioners<br \/>\nshould be heard on merits instead of dismissing the same on account of delay.\n<\/p>\n<p>               On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that<br \/>\na bare perusal of the contents of the application show that all what the petitioners<br \/>\nwanted the court to decide was a stale claim in the belated appeal filed by them.<br \/>\nThe contents clearly show that various officers of the petitioners were indecisive.<br \/>\nIn fact, they were not clear as to whether the appeal should be filed or not. The<br \/>\ncircumstances, as have been mentioned in the application for condonation of delay,<br \/>\ndo not make out ground for condoning such a huge delay. After the period for<br \/>\nfiling the appeal had expired, certain rights had been vested in the respondent<br \/>\nwhich should not be taken away lightly.\n<\/p>\n<p>               Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.<br \/>\n               A perusal of the impugned order, wherein the contents of the<br \/>\napplication filed by the petitioners for condonation of delay have been referred to,<br \/>\nshows that after the judgment was delivered by the trial court on 18.2.2005,<br \/>\ncertified copy thereof was applied on the same date, which was prepared on<br \/>\n1.3.2005 and delivered in the office of District Attorney on 3.3.2005, who opining<br \/>\nthat the case is not fit for filing the appeal forwarded the same to DPL, Punjab vide<br \/>\norder dated 7.3.2005, who also agreeing with the opinion expressed by the District<br \/>\nAttorney, forwarded the judgment and decree to the Secretary to the Government<br \/>\nof Punjab, Housing and Urban Development vide letter dated 16.3.2005. As to<br \/>\nwhat happened thereafter is not evident from the order. Simultaneously, District<br \/>\nTown Planner, Amritsar vide letter dated 13.4.2005 sought legal opinion from the<br \/>\nDistrict Attorney, Amritsar regarding the case being fit\/unfit for filing the appeal.<br \/>\nDistrict Attorney, Amritsar, vide letter dated 21.4.2005 intimated the District<br \/>\nTown Planner that the Chief Town Planner and DPL, Punjab had already<br \/>\nconsidered the case to be not fit for filing appeal, which was conveyed by the<br \/>\nDistrict Town Planner to the Chief Town Planner. The Senior Town Planner,<br \/>\nAmritsar sought certain documents from the District Town Planner vide letter<br \/>\ndated 18.5.2005 which were supplied on 15.6.2005 which, in turn, were sent to<br \/>\nChief Town Planner on 27.6.2005. Department of Housing and Urban<br \/>\nDevelopment, vide letter dated 8.9.2005, sought certain information and<br \/>\ndocuments from the Chief Town Planner who sent the required documents vide<br \/>\nletter dated 5.10.2005. As the finance was involved, the matter was sent to the<br \/>\nFinance Department who opined that the order is required to be challenged in<br \/>\nappeal. As to when they had received the documents and when the opinion was<br \/>\n C.R. No. 5873 of 2007                                         [3]<\/p>\n<p>expressed is not forthcoming. All what is mentioned is that vide letter dated<br \/>\n10.5.2006, Chief Town Planner, Punjab was directed to file appeal. Thereafter,<br \/>\nDistrict Town Planner, Amritsar requested District Attorney, Amritsar vide letter<br \/>\ndated 15.6.2006 to file appeal. The District Attorney replied back vide letter dated<br \/>\n19.6.2006 that the appeal cannot be filed without fresh instructions from the DPL,<br \/>\nPunjab. The matter was again referred back. Thereafter, Joint Secretary to the<br \/>\nGovernment of Punjab, Housing and Urban Development, vide letter dated<br \/>\n11.7.2006 accorded sanction for filing the appeal and thereafter the same was filed<br \/>\non 31.7.2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>                The aforesaid sequence of facts shows that the attitude and the<br \/>\nmanner in which the case was dealt with at appropriate stages was totally casual.<br \/>\nOnce different authorities had already opined that the case was not fit for filing<br \/>\nappeal , on the objection raised by the Finance Department, the appeal was filed. It<br \/>\nwas for the petitioners to devise a system whereby a final decision regarding filing<br \/>\nor non-filing of an appeal is taken by an authority which is competent and which<br \/>\ncan go into the merits of the controversy as well. In the present case, different<br \/>\nauthorities were having different opinions. This cannot be said to be a reasonable<br \/>\nground for condonation of delay of 488 days in filing the appeal. If the State<br \/>\nauthorities cannot set their home in order, the limitation cannot be re-written to<br \/>\ncondone such a huge delay.\n<\/p>\n<p>                Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The same<br \/>\nis dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                               (Rajesh Bindal)<br \/>\n                                                                      Judge<br \/>\n16.1.2009<br \/>\nmk\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009 C.R. No. 5873 of 2007 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5873 of 2007 (O&amp;M) Date of decision: January 16, 2009 The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development, Punjab and others .. Petitioners v. Sukhwinder Singh [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-198116","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 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\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-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=\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-09T18:17:39+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-09T18:17:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":986,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\",\"name\":\"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-09T18:17:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 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":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 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\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-09T18:17:39+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009","datePublished":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-09T18:17:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009"},"wordCount":986,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009","name":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-09T18:17:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-sukhwinder-singh-on-16-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Secretary vs Sukhwinder Singh on 16 January, 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\/198116","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=198116"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198116\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=198116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=198116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=198116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}