{"id":217214,"date":"1996-08-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-08-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996"},"modified":"2017-02-21T08:03:45","modified_gmt":"2017-02-21T02:33:45","slug":"sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","title":{"rendered":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: JT 1996 (7),    438\t  1996 SCALE  (6)151<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Jeevan Reddy<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Jeevan Reddy, B.P. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSITA DEVI AND OTHERS,ETC. ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF HARYANA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t23\/08\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nJEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)\nBENCH:\nJEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)\nMANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n JT 1996 (7)   438\t  1996 SCALE  (6)151\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t      J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nB.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>WRIT PETITION (C) NO.584 OF 1989<br \/>\n     In this  writ petition  filed under  Article 32  of the<br \/>\nConstitution of\t India, three  reliefs are  asked for  by as<br \/>\nmany as 748 petitioners. The reliefs sought for are:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;(a) Issue\t writ in  the nature  of<br \/>\n     mandamus or  any appropriate  writ,<br \/>\n     order   or\t  direction   that   the<br \/>\n     petitioners be treated to be in the<br \/>\n     service of the respondents from the<br \/>\n     date of  their initial  appointment<br \/>\n     irrespective   be\t  there\t   being<br \/>\n     artificial break  in their services<br \/>\n     during the period.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (b)  Issue\t  an  appropriate  writ,<br \/>\n     order   or\t   direction   to    the<br \/>\n     respondents to  put the petitioners<br \/>\n     on regular\t pay scales  to that  of<br \/>\n     primary  school   teachers\t in  the<br \/>\n     Education\tDepartment   of\t Haryana<br \/>\n     plus other\t consequential\tbenefits<br \/>\n     from  the\tdate  of  their\t initial<br \/>\n     appointment and  further direct the<br \/>\n     respondents to  pay the petitioners<br \/>\n     the difference in arrears of salary<br \/>\n     accrued to\t them from  the date  of<br \/>\n     their initial appointment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (c)  Issue\t  by  appropriate  writ,<br \/>\n     order   or\t  direction   that   the<br \/>\n     department of  Audit Education  and<br \/>\n     Non-formal Education is a permanent<br \/>\n     department of  the\t State\tand  the<br \/>\n     petitioners are regular teachers in<br \/>\n     the  department  appointed\t against<br \/>\n     sanctioned posts of Instructors.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     On the  date of  the filing of the writ petition (March<br \/>\n1989) the  petitioners were  working as\t &#8220;under\t matriculate<br \/>\ninstructors in\tthe Adult Literacy Programme&#8221; devised by the<br \/>\nGovernment of  Haryana. They  were being  paid\ta  lump\t sum<br \/>\namount of Rs.200\/- per month as salary. They had put in 5 to<br \/>\n6 years service and have been performing their duties to the<br \/>\nsatisfaction of all concerned. Their submission is that when<br \/>\nmatriculate instructors\t approached this  Court for  similar<br \/>\nreliefs, they  were granted  certain reliefs  though not all<br \/>\nthe reliefs  asked for\tby them.  The reference\t is  to\t the<br \/>\njudgment of  this Court\t in <a href=\"\/doc\/146663\/\">Jaipal  and others\tv. State  of<br \/>\nHaryana and<\/a>  other [A.I.R.  1988 S.C. 1504 = 1968 (3) S.C.C.<br \/>\n354] wherein  this  Court  directed  that  the\t&#8220;matriculate<br \/>\ninstructors are\t entitled to  the same\tpay scale as that of<br \/>\nthe squad  teachers, having  regard to\tthe length  of their<br \/>\nservice with  effect from  their date of initial appointment<br \/>\nby ignoring  the break\tin service  on account of six months<br \/>\nfresh appointments.  It was  further directed  by this Court<br \/>\nthat the  said petitioners  will be entitled to the said pay<br \/>\nscales in  accordance with  law notwithstanding the break in<br \/>\nservice that  might have  taken place.\tThe said  directions<br \/>\nwere made  effective with  effect from\tSeptember  1,  1985.<br \/>\nHowever, the  claim for regularization of their services put<br \/>\nforward by the said petitioners was rejected, since the very<br \/>\nproject was  likely to\tlast only  till\t 1990.\tThe  present<br \/>\npetitioners&#8217; case  is that though they are non- matriculates<br \/>\nthey too  have been  performing the very same duties as were<br \/>\nbeing performed\t by  matriculate  teachers  (petitioners  in<br \/>\nJaipal). The  petitioners invoke the principle of &#8216;equal pay<br \/>\nfor equal work&#8217;. According to them, except the difference in<br \/>\nthe matter  of educational  qualifications there is no other<br \/>\ndistinction  between  the  post\t held  and  the\t duties\t and<br \/>\nfunctions performed  by the  petitioners in  Jaipal and\t the<br \/>\npetitioners herein.  They have\tset out in the writ petition<br \/>\nthe several  duties performed  by  them.  Reliance  is\talso<br \/>\nplaced upon  certain other  decisions of  this\tCourt  viz.,<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1230349\/\">Randhir Singh  v. Union\t of  India<\/a>  [1982  (3)\tS.C.R.\t298;<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/145498\/\">Dhirendra Chamoli v. State of U.P.<\/a> [1986 (1) S.C.C. 637] and<br \/>\nSurinder Singh\tv. Engineer-in-Chief,  CPWD [1986 (1) S.C.C.<br \/>\n639].\n<\/p>\n<p>     The  doctrine   of\t &#8216;equal\t  work\tfor  equal  pay&#8217;  is<br \/>\nrecognised by  this Court  as a facet of the equality clause<br \/>\ncontained in  Article 14  of the  Constitution. The first of<br \/>\nthe several  decisions on  the subject\tis <a href=\"\/doc\/1230349\/\">Randhir  Singh v.<br \/>\nUnion of  India<\/a> [1982 (1) S.C.C. 618]. The said doctrine has<br \/>\nbeen dealt  with by  this Court\t in several  later decisions<br \/>\nincluding <a href=\"\/doc\/1176691\/\">State\t of Madhya  Pradesh and\t Another  v.  Pramod<br \/>\nBhartiya and Others<\/a> [1993 (1) S.C.C. 539] decided by a three\n<\/p>\n<p>-member Bench  of which one of us (B.P.Jeevan Reddy, J.) was<br \/>\na member.  This decision  dealt mainly\twith the  manner  in<br \/>\nwhich the claim of equal work has to be judged. It was held,<br \/>\nafter referring to the definition of &#8220;same work or work of a<br \/>\nsimilar nature&#8221;\t in Section  2(h) of  Equal Remuneration Act<br \/>\n1976, that:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;the stress  is upon the similarity<br \/>\n     of skill, effort and responsibility<br \/>\n     when   performed\t under\t similar<br \/>\n     conditions. Further, as pointed but<br \/>\n     by Mukharji, J. (as he then was) in<br \/>\n     Federation of All India Customs and<br \/>\n     Excise  Stenographers   [1988   (3)<br \/>\n     S.C.C.  91\t  :   1988   SCC   (L&amp;S)<br \/>\n     673:(1988) 7  ATC 591]  the quality<br \/>\n     of work may vary from post to post.<br \/>\n     It may  vary  from\t institution  to<br \/>\n     institution. We  cannot  ignore  or<br \/>\n     overlook this  reality. It is not a<br \/>\n     matter of\tassumption  but\t one  of<br \/>\n     proof. It\tmust be\t remembered that<br \/>\n     since the\tplea of\t equal\tpay  for<br \/>\n     equal work\t has to be examined with<br \/>\n     reference to Article 14, the burden<br \/>\n     is\t  upon\t  the\tpetitioners   to<br \/>\n     establish their right to equal pay,<br \/>\n     or the  plea of  discrimination, as<br \/>\n     the case may be.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     It was  observed in  the said decision, on the basis of<br \/>\nthe  earlier   decisions  of  this  Court,  that  where\t the<br \/>\npetitioners complain  of unlawful  discrimination  offending<br \/>\nArticle 14,  it is  for them  to satisfy  the Court that the<br \/>\ndistinction made  is irrational\t and baseless  and  that  it<br \/>\nreally amounts\tto  unlawful  discrimination  prohibited  by<br \/>\nArticle 14.  Applying the  principle of the said decision to<br \/>\nthis case, can it be said that the petitioner herein who are<br \/>\nnon-matriculate instructors  are similarly placed to that of<br \/>\nthe matriculate\t instructors or\t that the  distinction\tmade<br \/>\nbetween both  the categories  is irrational  or baseless. In<br \/>\nother words,  the question  is\twhether\t the  Government  of<br \/>\nHaryana is  guilty of unlawful discrimination in refusing to<br \/>\nextend to  non-matriculate instructors\tthe pay-scale  which<br \/>\nhas been extended to matriculate instructors pursuant to the<br \/>\njudgment of  this Court\t in Jaipal.  We\t do  not  think\t on.<br \/>\nClassification on  the basis  of educational  qualifications<br \/>\nhas always  been upheld\t by this  Court\t as  reasonable\t and<br \/>\npermissible under  Article 14.\tIn The\tState of  Mysore and<br \/>\nanother v.  P. Narasinga  Rao [A.I.R.  1968 S.C.  349],\t the<br \/>\nGovernment of  Karnataka had prescribed two different scales<br \/>\nfor tracers  &#8211; one for matriculate tracers with higher scale<br \/>\nand another  for  non-matriculate  tracers  with  lower\t pay<br \/>\nscale.\t The\tnon-matriculate\t  tracers    complained\t  of<br \/>\ndiscrimination. The  said plea\twas negatived  holding\tthat<br \/>\nprescribing two\t different scales  for matriculates and non-<br \/>\nmatriculates is\t not violative\tof Article 14 and 16. It was<br \/>\nheld  that  distinction\t made  on  the\tbasis  of  technical<br \/>\nqualifications or  for that  matter even  on  the  basis  of<br \/>\ngeneral\t  educational\tqualifications\t relevant   to\t the<br \/>\nsuitability  of\t  the  candidate   for\tpublic\t service  is<br \/>\npermissible under  the said  articles. Indeed,\tin that case<br \/>\nboth the  matriculate and non-matriculate tracers formed one<br \/>\nsingle category\t with one  single pay  scale earlier. It was<br \/>\nonly at\t a later  stage that  a distinction was made between<br \/>\nmatriculates and  non-matriculates, which  led to  the\tsaid<br \/>\nproceedings. This  Court proceeded  on the  assumption\tthat<br \/>\nboth matriculates  and non-matriculate\ttracers &#8220;were  doing<br \/>\nthe same  kind of  work&#8221;; yet  the classification  made\t was<br \/>\nupheld as  permissible under  Articles\t14  and\t 16  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution.  Distinction   on\t the  basis  of\t educational<br \/>\nqualifications has  been upheld\t as valid by this Court in a<br \/>\nlarge number  of cases\tsince. By  way of  illustration,  in<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1264252\/\">State of  Jammu and  Kashmir v.\t Triloki Nath  Khosa<\/a> [A.I.R.<br \/>\n1974 S.C.  1] the  classification of  Assistant Engineers as<br \/>\ndiploma\t holders  and  degree  holders\tand  providing\tmore<br \/>\npromotional  avenues   to  degree   holders  was  upheld  as<br \/>\nreasonable. The\t later decision\t in <a href=\"\/doc\/1043027\/\">P. Murugesan &amp; Others v.<br \/>\nState of  Tamil Nadu<\/a>  [1993 (2)\t S.C.C. 340)  is also to the<br \/>\nsame effect.  In this  decision, all  the decisions  on\t the<br \/>\nsubject\t of  classification  on\t the  basis  of\t educational<br \/>\nqualifications have been fully discussed.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We are,  therefore, of  the opinion  that the grievance<br \/>\nmade by the petitioners is unacceptable. We may also mention<br \/>\nthat apart  from relying  upon the decision of this Court in<br \/>\nJaipal and  claiming that  the benefit\tgiven to matriculate<br \/>\nteachers should\t also be  given to them, no attempt has been<br \/>\nmade in the writ petition to allege and establish that their<br \/>\nqualifications; duties and functions are similar to those of<br \/>\nsquad teachers.\n<\/p>\n<p>     For the  above reasons,  the writ petition fails and is<br \/>\naccordingly dismissed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>W.P. (C) NOS.1008\/88, 815\/88 545\/92<br \/>\n     No separate  arguments  are  addressed  in\t these\twrit<br \/>\npetitions. They\t too are  accordingly dismissed for the very<br \/>\nsame reasons. No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 Equivalent citations: JT 1996 (7), 438 1996 SCALE (6)151 Author: B Jeevan Reddy Bench: Jeevan Reddy, B.P. (J) PETITIONER: SITA DEVI AND OTHERS,ETC. ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23\/08\/1996 BENCH: [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-217214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - 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\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\" \/>\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=\"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-21T02:33:45+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=\"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\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-21T02:33:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\"},\"wordCount\":1441,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\",\"name\":\"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-21T02:33:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996\"}]},{\"@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":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - 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\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-21T02:33:45+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996","datePublished":"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-21T02:33:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996"},"wordCount":1441,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996","name":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-21T02:33:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sita-devi-and-othersetc-etc-vs-state-of-haryana-ors-on-23-august-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sita Devi And Others,Etc. Etc vs State Of Haryana &amp; Ors on 23 August, 1996"}]},{"@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\/217214","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=217214"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217214\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217214"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217214"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217214"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}