{"id":227047,"date":"2010-01-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010"},"modified":"2016-03-17T22:13:41","modified_gmt":"2016-03-17T16:43:41","slug":"cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>Court No. - 26\n\nCase :- WRIT - A No. - 1477 of 2010\n\nPetitioner :- C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru' Its Manager &amp; Another\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. &amp; Others\nPetitioner Counsel :- R.N. Yadav,Ashok Khare\nRespondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,V.K. Kushwaha\n\nHon'ble Shishir Kumar,J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri R.N.Yadav,<br \/>\nlearned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri V.K.Khushwaha, learned<br \/>\ncounsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 &amp; 5 and learned Standing Counsel.\n<\/p>\n<p>This writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders dated 30.11.2009 and<br \/>\n23.12.2009 passed by Basic Shiksha Adhikari, District Mau respondent No.3<br \/>\n(Annexure 17 and 19A to the writ petition). Further a writ in the nature of<br \/>\nmandamus commanding the respondents to accord approval to petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nappointment on the basis of papers submitted on 25.11.2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>Petitioners submit that on the basis of advertisement as provided under<br \/>\nRegulation 7 of U.P. Recognized Basic School (Recruitment of Teachers)<br \/>\nRules, 1978 petitioner was selected according to merit after constitution of the<br \/>\nSelection Committee and name of petitioner was at Serial No.5 according to<br \/>\nthe marks obtained in the interview, petitioner obtained 98.66 marks, which<br \/>\nwas highest. It appears that on the basis of some complaint by one Sandeep<br \/>\nYadav and one Ramesh Singh, alleged himself to be founder of the Society an<br \/>\norder dated 13.10.2005 has been passed that the appointment has not been<br \/>\nmade strictly in accordance with the Rules and, therefore, no approval can be<br \/>\ngranted. Petitioner coming to know regarding the aforesaid fact filed a writ<br \/>\npetition to this effect bringing the correct facts but respondents Basic Shiksha<br \/>\nAdhikari vide its order dated 23.12.2009 placing reliance upon the aforesaid<br \/>\norder has passed an order dated 23.12.2009 (Annexure 19 A to the writ<br \/>\npetition) holding therein that proper procedure as provided has not been<br \/>\nfollowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate, has submitted that there is no such<br \/>\nprocedure as provided under Regulation 7 of Rules 1978 and admittedly after<br \/>\npublication, Selection Committee was constituted and petitioner was<br \/>\nappointed, therefore, it cannot be held that there is any illegality in the<br \/>\nselection made. Further the order impugned is an order without any notice and<br \/>\nopportunity to petitioner, as such, the same is liable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>I have considered the submissions made on behalf of learned Standing<br \/>\nCounsel as well as the counsel for the Basic Shiksha Parishad. Respondents<br \/>\nare not able to show from the record that any violation of rules relating to<br \/>\nappointment has been made and they are not also able to show from the<br \/>\nrecord that this order has been passed after affording opportunity to petitioner<br \/>\nas well as the Committee of Management.\n<\/p>\n<p>In such circumstances, I am of the view that the orders passed by respondents<br \/>\nBasic Shiksha Adhikari is not sustainable in law in view of the fact that no<br \/>\n reasons have been recorded. Therefore, there will be a presumption that order<br \/>\nis non-application of mind without assigning any reason.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is well settled that an order having civil consequences even though passed<br \/>\nby the administrative authority must contain reasons so as to enable the<br \/>\naggrieved party to challenge the reasoning of the administrative authority. In<br \/>\nthe absence of reasons no foundation can be laid down by the petitioner and<br \/>\nonly argument remains is that the order is based upon non-application of<br \/>\nmind. In our view if the reasoning of an order passed against the aggrieved<br \/>\nperson is not communicated and only a communication regarding decision has<br \/>\nbeen communicated it cannot be assailed by the respondents that the<br \/>\ngrievance of a person has been decided. In our opinion, it is no order in eye of<br \/>\nlaw and it has no legs to stand.\n<\/p>\n<p>In case of S.N.Mukherjee Vs. Union of India reported in A.I.R. 1984 the<br \/>\nApex Court has already held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In view of the expanding horizon of the principles of natural justice, the<br \/>\nrequirement to record reason an be regarded as one of the principles of<br \/>\nnatural justice which govern exercise of power by administrative authorities.<br \/>\nThe rules of natural justice are not embodied rules. The extent of their<br \/>\napplication depends upon the particular statutory framework where under<br \/>\njurisdiction has been conferred on the administrative authority. With regard<br \/>\nto the exercise of a particular power by an administrative authority including<br \/>\nexercise of judicial or quasi-judicial functions the legislature, while<br \/>\nconferring the said power, may feel that it would not be in the larger public<br \/>\ninterest that the reasons for the order passed by the administrative authority<br \/>\nbe recorded in the order and be communicated to the aggrieved party and it<br \/>\nmay dispense with such a requirement. It may do so by making an express<br \/>\nprovision to that effect. Such an exclusion can also arise by necessary<br \/>\nimplication from the nature of the subject matter, the scheme and the<br \/>\nprovisions of the enactment. The public interest under lying such a provision<br \/>\nwould outweigh the salutary purpose served by the requirement to record the<br \/>\nreasons. The said requirement cannot, therefore, be insisted upon in such a<br \/>\ncase. Therefore except in cases where the requirement has been disposed with<br \/>\nexpressly or by necessary implications, an administrative authority exercising<br \/>\njudicial or quasi-judicial functions is required to record the reasons for its<br \/>\ndecision.\n<\/p>\n<p>The recording of reasons by an administrative authority serves a salutary<br \/>\npurpose, namely, it excludes chances of arbitrariness and assures a degree of<br \/>\nfairness in the process of decision-making. The said purpose would apply<br \/>\nequally to all decisions and its application cannot be confined to decisions<br \/>\nwhich are subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. Therefore, the<br \/>\nrequirement that reasons be recorded should govern the decisions of an<br \/>\nadministrative authority exercising quasi-judicial functions irrespective of the<br \/>\nfact whether the decision is subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. It is<br \/>\nhowever not required that the reasons should be as elaborate as in the<br \/>\ndecision of a Court of law. The extent and nature of the reasons would<br \/>\ndepend on particular facts and circumstances. What is necessary is that the<br \/>\nreasons are clear and explicitly so as to indicate that the authority has been<br \/>\ndue consideration to the points in controversy. The need for recording of<br \/>\nreasons is greater in a case where the order is passed at the original stage.<br \/>\n The appellate or revisional authority, if it affirms such an order, need not<br \/>\ngive separate reasons if the appellate or revisional authority agrees with the<br \/>\nreasons contained in the order under challenge.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In the case of Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher<br \/>\nSecondary Education Vs. K.S.Gandhi and others reported in 1991 (2)<br \/>\nSCC, 716 the Apex Court has held as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The reasons are harbinger between the mind of the maker of the order to the<br \/>\ncontroversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at. They also<br \/>\nexclude the chances to reach arbitrary, whimsical or capricious decision or<br \/>\nconclusion. The reasons assure an Inbuilt support to the conclusion\/decision<br \/>\nreached. When an order affects the right of a citizen or a person, irrespective<br \/>\nof the fact whether it is a quasi-judicial or administrative order, and unless<br \/>\nthe rule expressly or by necessary implication excludes recording of reasons,<br \/>\nit is implicit that the principles of natural justice or fair play require<br \/>\nrecording of germane and precise relevant reasons as a part of fair<br \/>\nprocedure. In an administrative decision, its order\/decision itself may not<br \/>\ncontain reasons. It may not be the requirement of the rules, but a the least,<br \/>\nthe record should disclose reasons. It may not be like a judgement. The extent<br \/>\nand nature of the reasons would depend on particular facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances. What is necessary is that the reasons are clear and explicitly<br \/>\nso as to indicate that the authority has given due consideration to the points<br \/>\nin controversy. The need for recording of reasons is greater in a case where<br \/>\nthe order is passed at the original stage. The appellate or revisional<br \/>\nauthority, of it affirms such an order, need not give separate reasons. If the<br \/>\nappellate or revisional authority disagrees, the reasons must be contained in<br \/>\nthe order under challenge. The recording of reasons is also an assurance that<br \/>\nthe authority concerned consciously applied its mind to the facts on record. It<br \/>\nalso aids the appellate or revisional authority or the supervisory jurisdiction<br \/>\nof the High Court under Article 226 or the appellate jurisdiction of the<br \/>\nSupreme Court under Article 136 to see whether the authority concerned<br \/>\nacted fairly and justly to mete out justice to the aggrieved person.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In the case of M\/s Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar Vs. State of U.P. &amp;<br \/>\nothers reported in AIR 1970, SC, 1302, the Apex Court has held as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The High Court in rejecting the petition filed by the appellants has observed<br \/>\nthat the District Magistrate in considering the explanation of the appellants<br \/>\nhad &#8220;considered all the materials&#8221; and also that &#8220;the State Government in<br \/>\nconsidering the appeal had considered all the materials&#8221;. We have, however,<br \/>\nnothing on the record to show what materials if any were considered by the<br \/>\nDistrict Magistrate and the State Government. The High Court has also<br \/>\nobserved that Clause 7 of the Sugar Dealers&#8217; Licensing Order does not<br \/>\nrequire &#8220;the State Government to pass a reasoned order. All that is required<br \/>\nis to give an aggrieved person an opportunity of being heard.&#8221; We are of the<br \/>\nview that the High court erred in so holding. The appellants have a right not<br \/>\nonly to have an opportunity to make a representation, but they are entitled to<br \/>\nhave their representation considered by an Authority unconcerned with the<br \/>\ndispute and to be given information which would show the decision was<br \/>\nreached on the merits and not on considerations of policy or expency. This is<br \/>\na clear implication of the nature of the jurisdiction exercised by the appellate<br \/>\nauthority; it is not required to be expressly mentioned in the statute. There is<br \/>\n nothing on the record which shows that the representation made by the<br \/>\nappellants was even considered. The fact that Clause 7 of the Sugar Dealers&#8217;<br \/>\nLicensing Order to which the High Court has referred does not &#8220;require the<br \/>\nState Government to pass a reasoned order&#8221; is wholly irrelevant. The nature<br \/>\nof the proceeding requires that the State Government must given adequate<br \/>\nreasons which disclose that an attempt was made to reach a conclusion<br \/>\naccording to law and justice.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In view of aforesaid fact, The writ petition is allowed. The orders dated<br \/>\n30.11.2009 and 23.12.2009 passed by Basic Shiksha Adhikari- respondent<br \/>\nNo.3 (Annexure 17 and 19A to the writ petition) are hereby quashed and the<br \/>\nmatter is remanded back to respondent No.3 i.e. District Basic Education<br \/>\nOfficer, District Mau to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with<br \/>\nlaw taking into consideration the relevant rules after affording full opportunity<br \/>\nto petitioner as well as Committee of Management within a period of two<br \/>\nmonths from the date of production of certified copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Order Date :- 13.1.2010<br \/>\nSKD\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010 Court No. &#8211; 26 Case :- WRIT &#8211; A No. &#8211; 1477 of 2010 Petitioner :- C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its Manager &amp; Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. &amp; Others Petitioner [&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-227047","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#039; Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 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\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#039; Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-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=\"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-17T16:43:41+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C\\\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-17T16:43:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1816,\"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\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\",\"name\":\"C\\\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru' Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-17T16:43:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C\\\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru' Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 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\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru' Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-17T16:43:41+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-17T16:43:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010"},"wordCount":1816,"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\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010","name":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru' Its ... vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-17T16:43:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/cm-shri-ram-j-h-school-thru-its-vs-state-of-u-p-others-on-13-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C\/M Shri Ram J.H. School Thru&#8217; Its &#8230; vs State Of U.P. &amp; Others on 13 January, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/227047","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=227047"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/227047\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=227047"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=227047"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=227047"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}