{"id":244683,"date":"2003-04-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-04-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003"},"modified":"2016-06-28T19:08:49","modified_gmt":"2016-06-28T13:38:49","slug":"management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","title":{"rendered":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Shivaraj V. Patil, Arijit Pasayat<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5228 of 2000\n\nPETITIONER:\nMANAGEMENT OF THE GOODWILL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL AND ANR.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSMT. J. MARY SUSHEELA AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 29\/04\/2003\n\nBENCH:\nSHIVARAJ V. PATIL &amp; ARIJIT PASAYAT\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>2003(3) SCR 1013<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<\/p>\n<p>ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. A controversy which could have been solved long back has<br \/>\nbeen blown out of proportion, making the parties travel through the<br \/>\ncorridors of various courts and has finally landed in this Court. Whenever<br \/>\nthere is prolongation of litigation, ultimate sufferers are the litigating<br \/>\nparties, and inevitably justice delivery system. Resultant is miscarriage<br \/>\nof justice. It is painful to notice that the arduous journey of litigating<br \/>\nparties started about two decades back in an educational institution, named<br \/>\nGoodwill Girls&#8217; High School. Ironically, the controversy started because of<br \/>\nalleged &#8220;ill will&#8221; amongst the parties. Helen Keller, the great humanist<br \/>\nhad once said: &#8220;The highest result of education is tolerance.&#8221; But the<br \/>\nfoundation of the dispute was alleged intolerance by those who matter, in<br \/>\nthe concerned educational institution.\n<\/p>\n<p>Steering clear of the red herrings, the factual scenario is as follows:<br \/>\nSmt. J. Mary Susheela-respondent no.l in this appeal filed a suit No. 10050<br \/>\nof 1985 in the Court of City Civil Judge, Bangalore seeking a mandatory<br \/>\ninjunction directing the defendants (the appellants in this appeal) to<br \/>\nassign teaching work to her pursuant to the order of the appointment. Her<br \/>\nclaim essentially was that she was selected for appointment as a teacher in<br \/>\nthe appellant no.1 institution, but no order of appointment was issued by<br \/>\nthe then Principal who was also in the Selection Committee, primarily<br \/>\nbecause She had not agreed to her appointment during the course of<br \/>\nselection. The suit was dismissed. However, the trial Court observed that<br \/>\nin the interest of the students community, which is of utmost importance,<br \/>\nit was hoped that the Selection Committee will issue formal order of<br \/>\nappointment without further delay. In view of this observation the<br \/>\nManagement of the School issued a letter of appointment directing the<br \/>\nplaintiff to report for duties on or before 15.6.1985. Plaintiff claimed<br \/>\nthat though she reported for duty, the Principal (defendant No.2) did not<br \/>\nallow her to function. That led to filing of the second suit to which this<br \/>\nappeal relates, bearing OS.No. 10456\/1985. By order dated 27.9.1988 the XIX<br \/>\nAdditional City Civil Judge passed an order purportedly under Order 14 Rule<br \/>\n2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short &#8216;the CPC&#8217;). It is to be noted<br \/>\nthat though six issues were framed, the only issue which was taken up was<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(1) Whether the plaintiff proves that she is entitled for mandatory<br \/>\ninjunction directing the defendant to assign the work as claimed in the<br \/>\nsuit?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The trial Court dismissed the suit, inter alia, observing as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In the result, in view of my foregoing discussions my finding on issue<br \/>\nNo.1 is that the plaintiff has failed to establish that she is entitled for<br \/>\nmandatory injunction directing the defendant to assign the work as claimed<br \/>\nin the suit. Consequently, the suit fails and the same is hereby<br \/>\ndismissed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Plaintiff filed an appeal before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore.<br \/>\nBy the impugned judgment the learned Single Judge decreed the suit with<br \/>\ncosts and additionally directed that payment was to be made to the<br \/>\nplaintiff by the 1st defendant w.e.f. 10.6.1985. Said judgment is assailed<br \/>\nin this appeal by the two defendants i.e. Management of the School and the<br \/>\nPrincipal.\n<\/p>\n<p>The basic ground for challenge is that learned Single Judge expanded the<br \/>\nscope of the appeal and when one issue was taken up by the trial Court, it<br \/>\nwas not open to the High Court to take all the issues that were framed<br \/>\ninitially by the trial Court and render findings on those issues. The<br \/>\nplaintiff was working in another institution and, therefore, the direction<br \/>\nfor paying salary right from 10.6.1985 is without any justification.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-respondent in response,<br \/>\nsubmitted that the present appeal was limited to the question of back wages<br \/>\nand the appellant no.l in this appeal having conceded to the position that<br \/>\nthe plaintiff-respondent was entitled to the benefits claimed, the suit has<br \/>\nbeen rightly decreed on the concessions and admissions made by defendant<br \/>\nno.l. Though defendant no.2 (appellant no.2 herein) resisted the claim, the<br \/>\nsame was of no consequence because the appointment was made by the<br \/>\nManagement-appellant no.1 and being an employee of appellant-defendant<br \/>\nno.l, the appellant no.2 could not have taken any stand at variance with<br \/>\nthe Management.\n<\/p>\n<p>With reference to Order 12 Rule 6 CPC, it is pointed out that on the basis<br \/>\nof concessions made, part decree could have been passed. It is pointed out<br \/>\nthat pursuant to the various interim orders passed by this Court,<br \/>\nplaintiff-respondent no.l is rendering services and while passing the<br \/>\ninterim orders this Court has taken serious note of the conduct of<br \/>\nManagement in appointing another person on regular basis. She was directed<br \/>\nto be impleaded in the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>At this juncture, it is to be noted that interim orders have been passed in<br \/>\nthis appeal earlier. With a view to ascertain the stand of the State of<br \/>\nKarnataka as to whether the appointment of plaintiff was approved by the<br \/>\nState Government notice was issued to the State. In an affidavit filed, the<br \/>\nState has taken the stand that no approval was accorded to the appointment<br \/>\nof the plaintiff and her post was an unaided one. It is to be noted that<br \/>\nthis Court had directed that the person who was appointed subsequently was<br \/>\nto be treated against the unaided post, while the plaintiff-respondent was<br \/>\nto be adjusted against the aided post. Learned counsel for the said<br \/>\nemployee submitted that she was not a party to the suit, and no direction<br \/>\nhas been given by the trial Court and the High Court so far as she is<br \/>\nconcerned, and there is nothing on record to show that she was appointed in<br \/>\nrespect of the post claimed by the plaintiff-respondent no.l. In this view,<br \/>\nthe orders so far as she is concerned, should be recalled.\n<\/p>\n<p>As the factual scenario goes to show, the controversy has remained unabated<br \/>\nfor nearly two decades. The trial Court decided only one issue in terms of<br \/>\nOrder 14 Rule 2 CPC though there is no specific reference to the provision<br \/>\nmade in the order. It has been only stated &#8220;Order on issue No.l.&#8221; The High<br \/>\nCourt, however, treated it to be in terms of Order 14 Rule 2. It is<br \/>\nsignificant to note that in the memorandum of appeal before the High Court,<br \/>\nplaintiff took exceptions to disposal of the suit on one issue alone. It<br \/>\nwas specifically pleaded that the trial Court should have adjudicated all<br \/>\nthe issues and it having not done so she was prejudiced. The ground No.16<br \/>\nspells out the specific grievance of the plaintiff and reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(16)- That the learned Judge ought to have given his own findings on all<br \/>\nthe issues however without considering the other issues. The learned Judge<br \/>\nhas dismissed the suit basing his findings only on Issue No.l. The absence<br \/>\nof finding on other issues has resulted in gross injustice.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The points of law formulated in paras (3) and (4) were as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(3)- Whether the Trial Court was required in law to try all the ISSUES and<br \/>\npronounce on all the issues arising in the suit?\n<\/p>\n<p>(4) Whether the Trial Court was justified in trying Issue No.l as a<br \/>\npreliminary ISSUE and dismiss the suit as not maintainable without giving a<br \/>\nfinding on all the other ISSUES?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>No evidence was led by the parties. Even the plaintiff was not examined.<br \/>\nWhat is the effect of alleged admission\/concession by the Management, if<br \/>\nany, was required to be considered in the light of stand taken by the other<br \/>\ndefendant. That aspect seems to have been completely lost sight of by the<br \/>\nHigh Court. As no evidence was led, the High Court ought not to have<br \/>\nconsidered all the issues; particularly when plaintiff herself had not<br \/>\nprayed for adjudication of other issues by the High Court. On the contrary,<br \/>\nher stand was that the trial Court should have decided all the issues. It<br \/>\nis of considerable importance that in the memorandum of appeal before the<br \/>\nHigh Court there was no plea or ground taken that the suit ought to have<br \/>\nbeen decreed on the basis of &#8216;alleged admission\/concession by defendant no.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.<\/p>\n<p>One aspect needs to be clarified. Present appeal is not confined to the<br \/>\nquestion of back wages as contended by plaintiff-respondent No.l. The plea<br \/>\nin that regard was an alternative one. The primary stand related to<br \/>\nlegality of the judgment in dealing with several issues when trial Court<br \/>\nhad dealt with only one issue.\n<\/p>\n<p>It pains us to note that the High Court has made certain observations which<br \/>\nhave absolutely no bearing on the subject-matter of the issues.and were not<br \/>\neven remotely connected with the subject-matter of controversy. That being<br \/>\nthe position, the, judgment of the High Court is indefensible and needs to<br \/>\nbe set aside, and we direct so. The matter shall be considered by the trial<br \/>\nCourt afresh.\n<\/p>\n<p>The engagement of the plaintiff-respondent no. 1 and Ms. Nancy shall<br \/>\ncontinue till disposal of the suit. We make it clear that we have not<br \/>\nexpressed any opinion on the respective stands. Ms. Nancy is not a party to<br \/>\nthe suit and so is the State. For effective adjudication they shall be<br \/>\nimpleaded as parties in the suit, in view of their impletion in the present<br \/>\nappeal. They shall be permitted to file written statements by 15.6.2003. If<br \/>\nthey fail to do so, the effect thereof shall be considered by the trial<br \/>\nCourt. Since the suit was filed in 1985, it would be appropriate if the-<br \/>\nsame, is disposed of before 2004 sets in.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appeal is allowed to the extent-indicated above with no order as to<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 Bench: Shivaraj V. Patil, Arijit Pasayat CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5228 of 2000 PETITIONER: MANAGEMENT OF THE GOODWILL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL AND ANR. RESPONDENT: SMT. J. MARY SUSHEELA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29\/04\/2003 [&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-244683","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>Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - 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\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-28T13:38:49+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-28T13:38:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1654,\"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\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\",\"name\":\"Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-28T13:38:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - 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\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-28T13:38:49+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003","datePublished":"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-28T13:38:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003"},"wordCount":1654,"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\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003","name":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls ... vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-04-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-28T13:38:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/management-of-the-goodwill-girls-vs-smt-j-mary-susheela-and-ors-on-29-april-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Management Of The Goodwill Girls &#8230; vs Smt. J. Mary Susheela And Ors on 29 April, 2003"}]},{"@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\/244683","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=244683"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244683\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244683"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244683"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244683"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}