{"id":226941,"date":"2010-02-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010"},"modified":"2016-02-17T10:18:24","modified_gmt":"2016-02-17T04:48:24","slug":"rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 February, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                                        1\n\n                                                             Court No. 11\n\n                      Writ Petition No. 1835 (M\/S) of 2007\n\nRama Kant Sharma                                             Petitioner\n\n                                  Vs.\n\nCommissioner, Faizabad and others                    Opposite parties\n\n                                  ----------------\n<\/pre>\n<p>Hon&#8217;ble Anil Kumar,J<\/p>\n<p>      Heard Sri Ravi Singh Sisodiya learned counsel for the petitioner<br \/>\nand Sri Rakesh Srivastava , learned Standing Counsel                  for the<br \/>\nrespondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>      By means of present writ petition , the petitioner has challenged<br \/>\nthe orders dated 7.3.2007 and 29.5.2006 passed by opposite parties no. 1<br \/>\nand 2 respectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The facts, in brief, as submitted by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner are that initially way of an agreement , license of fair price<br \/>\nshop was granted in favour of the petitioner for running a fair price shop<br \/>\nin village Bhatpurwa H\/o Niskapur Vikas Khand Banikodar, district<br \/>\nBarabanki. In respect of the operation of the petitioner of the fair price<br \/>\nshot of the petitioner, a complaint had been submitted by some persons<br \/>\nand on the basis of the same , an enquiry was conducted by the Supply<br \/>\nInspector, who submitted his report on 5.5.2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Thereafter, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on<br \/>\n9.5.2006, asking him to submit his reply. In response to which , the<br \/>\npetitioner had submitted his reply on 17.5.2006, denying the allegations<br \/>\nas made in the show cause notice.\n<\/p>\n<p>      By means of order dated 29.5.2006( Annexure-2 ) , the respondent<br \/>\nno.2 had cancelled the agreement of the petitioner for running the fair<br \/>\nprice shop against which the petitioner had filed an appeal before<br \/>\nopposite party no.1 which was also dismissed by order dated 7.3.2007<br \/>\n( Annexure-1 ) . Aggrieved by the said orders, present writ petition has<br \/>\nbeen filed before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>      While challenging the impugned orders , learned counsel for the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                       2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>petitioner submits that the explanation which was submitted by the<br \/>\npetitioner in response to the show cause notice dated 19.5.2006 was not<br \/>\nconsidered by the opposite party no.2 . Further, while passing the order<br \/>\ndated 29.5.2006 the opposite party no.2 had taken into consideration the<br \/>\nreport dated 25.5.2006 submitted by the Naib Tehsildar, the copy of the<br \/>\nsaid report was neither given to the petitioner nor any opportunity as<br \/>\nsuch the said action is against the fair place and natural justice . The said<br \/>\nplea was categorically brought to the notice of the parties concerned i.e.<br \/>\nopposite parties no. 1 and 2 even though the impugned orders had been<br \/>\npassed against the petitioner as such the same an arbitrary in nature and<br \/>\nliable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Sri Rakesh Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondents in rebuttal has submitted that after complaint made against<br \/>\nthe petitioner , an inquiry has been conducted and on the basis of the<br \/>\ninquiry,   report submitted by the Supply Inspector        on 5.5.2006 the<br \/>\npetitioner was asked to submit his reply and after considering the reply ,<br \/>\nthe order dated 29.5.2006 has been passed. He further submits that as a<br \/>\nmatter of fact the      report   which had been submitted by the Naib<br \/>\nTehsildar dated 25.5.2006 was nothing but in fact deto, the report already<br \/>\nsubmitted by the Supply Inspector dated 5.5.2006 as such there is neither<br \/>\nany illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the authorities concerned<br \/>\nin the present writ petition, so the present writ petition filed by the<br \/>\npetitioner is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the<br \/>\nrecord.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Admittedly, in the present case , initially a complaint has been<br \/>\nmade against the petitioner in respect to the operation\/ running a fair<br \/>\nprice shop by him and thereafter an enquiry was initiated and on the<br \/>\nbasis of the said enquiry , report was submitted by the Supply Inspector,<br \/>\naccordingly a show cause notice dated 19.5.2006 was issued to the<br \/>\npetitioner and after considering his reply an order dated 29.5.2006 has<br \/>\nbeen passed by the opposite party no.2 thereby cancelling the agreement<br \/>\nof the petitioner for running the fair price shop.\n<\/p>\n<p>      From the perusal of the order dated 29.5.2006 passed by opposite<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                       3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>party no.2 , it is Cristal clear that while passing the same, opposite party<br \/>\nno.2 had taken into consideration the report submitted by the Naib<br \/>\nTehsildar dated 25.5.2006. In the instant case , the said fact is not<br \/>\ndisputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned<br \/>\nStanding Counsel that the said report had not been supplied to the<br \/>\npetitioner nor any opportunity had been given to him to submit his reply<br \/>\nin response to the same as such the said action on the part of the opposite<br \/>\nparty no.2 placing reliance on the said report and taking action against<br \/>\nthe petitioner on the basis of the same is clearly violation of principle of<br \/>\nnatural justice as held by this regard this Court in the cases of Maiku Lal<br \/>\nVs. State of U.P. and others 2009 (27) LCD 1192, Rajpal Singh Vs. State<br \/>\nof U.P. and others, 2008 (16) LCD 891, Dori Lal Vs. State of U.P. and<br \/>\nothers, 2006 (24) LCD 1121 and            M\/s Mahatma Gandhi Upbhokta<br \/>\nSamitis Vs.State of U.P. and others 2001 (19) LCD 513.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Moreover, in the present case while passing the impugned order<br \/>\ndted 29.5.2006 opposite party no.2 had also not given any reasons<br \/>\nwhatsoever and under what circumstances the reply submitted by the<br \/>\npetitioner had been rejected. It is well settled proposition of law while<br \/>\npassing the order the authority concerned should give a reason under<br \/>\nwhat circumstances the explanation submitted by a person against whom<br \/>\nthe order has been passed has considered and rejected which is one of<br \/>\nthe fundamental requirement under law.\n<\/p>\n<p>       In view of the above said fact, the order dated 29.5.2006 passed by<br \/>\nopposite party no.2 and the oder dated 7.3.2007 passed by opposite party<br \/>\nno.1   are   hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the<br \/>\nopposite party no.2 to consider and decide the same within a period of<br \/>\nfour months from today. after affording an opportunity of hearing to the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>       It is further clarified that while deciding the dispute , the opposite<br \/>\nparty no.2 shall also supply all the necessary material documents to the<br \/>\npetitioner and after providing the same shall hear and passed a reasoned<br \/>\nand speaking orders in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>       For a period of four months or till the decision taken by the<br \/>\nlicensing authority in the matter whichever is earlier the license of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>shop in question shall remain suspended.\n<\/p>\n<p>      With the above observations, the writ petition is allowed.<br \/>\n2.2.2010<br \/>\nD.K.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 February, 2010 1 Court No. 11 Writ Petition No. 1835 (M\/S) of 2007 Rama Kant Sharma Petitioner Vs. Commissioner, Faizabad and others Opposite parties &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- Hon&#8217;ble Anil Kumar,J Heard Sri Ravi Singh Sisodiya learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rakesh Srivastava [&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":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-226941","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-17T04:48:24+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\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-17T04:48:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1028,\"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\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-17T04:48:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-17T04:48:24+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\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-17T04:48:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010"},"wordCount":1028,"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\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010","name":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-17T04:48:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rama-kant-sharma-vs-commissioner-faizabad-division-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rama Kant Sharma vs Commissioner Faizabad Division &#8230; on 2 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/226941","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=226941"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226941\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226941"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226941"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226941"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}