{"id":25471,"date":"2011-09-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-09-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011"},"modified":"2016-10-07T18:02:01","modified_gmt":"2016-10-07T12:32:01","slug":"shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011<\/div>\n
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                           Club Building (Near Post Office)\n                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067\n                                Tel: +91-11-26161796\n\n                                                    Decision No. CIC\/SM\/A\/2010\/001419\/SG\/14384\n                                                           Appeal No. CIC\/SM\/A\/2010\/001419\/SG\n\nRelevant facts emerging from the Appeal:\n\nAppellant                            :       Harish Kumar Yadav\n                                             Dr. Ambedkar Road\n                                             Nellikunji, Kasargod- 671121\n                                             Kerala\n\nRespondent                           :       Mr. Sinoy\n                                             PIO & Dy. General Manager\n                                             Syndicate Bank\n                                             Regional Office\n                                             Hampankatta, Mangalore 575001\n\nRTI application filed on             :       23\/01\/2009\nPIO replied on                       :       14\/12\/2009\nFirst Appeal filed on                :       29\/12\/2009\nFirst Appellate Authority order on   :       08\/01\/2010\nSecond Appeal received on            :       08\/10\/2010\n\nInformation Sought:\nThe Appellant has sought for the following information pertaining to Mrs. Aruna (W\/o Late Narayan\nNaik, Officer) Syndicate Bank, Attender, Syndicate Bank, Putter Main Branch:\n\n            a) The date of appointment of Mrs. Aruna in the Bank as Attendent\n            b) Whether her appointment is on compassionate grounds? i.e. due to demise of her\n               husband. If not on which ground she was appointed withal copies of connected paper\/\n               documents.\n            c) Copy of her appointment order, along with copies of applications for her claim from\n               appointment.\n            d) Total amount of terminal benefits paid to legal heir of Late Mr. Narayan Naik, H\/o Mrs.\n               Aruna.\n            e) Total amount of terminal benefits entitled to Late Mr. Narayan Naik mentioning name\n               of schemes like EPF Gratuity.\n            f) Mode of Payment of terminal benefits of Late Mr. Narayan Naik paid to his legal heirs\n               with proof of payments like copy of cheques or copy of credit voucher to the\n               beneficiary's accounts.\n            g) Total amount of liabilities of Late Mr. Narayana Naik in the bank as on the date of his\n               death furnishing loan a\/cs with outstanding dues and branch name.\n            h) Total amount credited to his loan accounts out of his terminal benefits due for him.\n\nReply of PIO:\nInformation sought by the Applicant cannot be provided as the same is exempted under section 8 (1)\n(j) & (e) of RTI Act, 2005.\n\nGrounds for the First Appeal:\nThe Appellant was not satisfied with the reply of PIO.\n\n                                                                                          Page 1 of 3\n Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):\nThe FAA has upheld the reply of the PIO\n\nGround of the Second Appeal:\nThe Appellant is not satisfied with the reply of the PIO and the order of FAA.\n\nRelevant Facts<\/pre>\n
 emerging during Hearing:\n<\/p>\n
The following were present
\nAppellant: Absent;\n<\/p>\n
Respondent: Mr. Sinoy, PIO & Dy. General Manager on video conference from NIC-Mangalore
\n               Studio;\n<\/p>\n
        The PIO has refused to give the information on all the queries claiming exemption under
\nSection 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. As far as the first 03 queries are concerned these seek information
\nabout the conditions of employment of a particular employee. The Commission does not agree that this
\ninformation could be considered an invasion on the privacy of an individual.\n<\/p>\n
Under Section 8 (1) (j) information which has been exempted is defined as:
\n“information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any
\npublic activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual
\nunless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate
\nauthority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such
\ninformation:”\n<\/p>\n
To qualify for this exemption the information must satisfy the following criteria:\n<\/p>\n
1. It must be personal information.\n<\/p>\n
Words in a law should normally be given the meanings given in common language. In common
\nlanguage we would ascribe the adjective ‘personal’ to an attribute which applies to an individual and
\nnot to an Institution or a Corporate. From this it flows that ‘personal’ cannot be related to Institutions,
\norganisations or corporates. Hence Section 8 (1) (j) cannot be applied when the information concerns
\ninstitutions, organisations or corporates.\n<\/p>\n
The phrase ‘disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest’ means that the
\ninformation must have been given in the course of a Public activity.
\nVarious Public authorities in performing their functions routinely ask for ‘personal’ information from
\nCitizens, and this is clearly a public activity. When a person applies for a job, or gives information
\nabout himself to a Public authority as an employee, or asks for a permission, licence or authorisation,
\nall these are public activities. Also when a Citizen provides information in discharge of a statutory
\nobligation this too is a public activity.\n<\/p>\n
We can also look at this from another aspect. The State has no right to invade the privacy of an
\nindividual. There are some extraordinary situations where the State may be allowed to invade the
\nprivacy of a Citizen. In those circumstances special provisions of the law apply;- usually with certain
\nsafeguards. Therefore where the State routinely obtains information from Citizens, this information is
\nin relationship to a public activity and will not be an intrusion on privacy.\n<\/p>\n
       Certain human rights such as liberty, freedom of expression or right to life are universal and
\ntherefore would apply uniformly to all human beings worldwide. However, the concept of ‘privacy’ is a
\ncultural notion, related to social norms, and different societies would look at these differently.
\nTherefore referring to the UK Data protection act or the laws of other countries to define ‘privacy’
\ncannot be considered a valid exercise to constrain the Citizen’s fundamental Right to Information in
\nIndia. Parliament has not codified the right to privacy so far, hence in balancing the Right to
\nInformation of Citizens and the individual’s Right to Privacy the Citizen’s Right to Information would
\nbe given greater weightage. The Supreme of India has ruled that Citizens have a right to know about
\ncharges against candidates for elections as well as details of their assets, since they desire to offer
\nthemselves for public service. It is obvious then that those who are public servants cannot claim
\nexemption from disclosure of charges against them or details of their assets. Given our dismal record
\nof misgovernance and rampant corruption which colludes to deny Citizens their essential rights and<\/p>\n
                                                                                                Page 2 of 3<\/span>
\n dignity, it is in the fitness of things that the Citizen’s Right to Information is given greater primacy
\nwith regard to privacy.\n<\/p>\n
Therefore we can state that disclosure of information such as assets of a Public servant, -which is
\nroutinely collected by the Public authority and routinely provided by the Public servants,- cannot be
\nconstrued as an invasion on the privacy of an individual. There will only be a few exceptions to this
\nrule which might relate to information which is obtained by a Public authority while using
\nextraordinary powers such as in the case of a raid or phone tapping.\n<\/p>\n
In view of the above the commission does not agree with the PIO’s contention that queries (a), (b) &\n<\/p>\n
(c) are exempted under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
Decision:\n<\/p>\n
The Appeal is allowed.\n<\/p>\n
      The PIO is directed to provide the information on queries (a), (b) & (c) to the
\nAppellant before 20 September 2011.\n<\/p>\n
This decision is announced in open chamber.\n<\/p>\n
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.\n<\/p>\n
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                                    Shailesh Gandhi
\n                                                                                          Information Commissioner
\n                                                                                                 05 September 2011
\n(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (AM)<\/p>\n
                                                                                                              Page 3 of 3<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi – 110067 Tel: +91-11-26161796 Decision No. CIC\/SM\/A\/2010\/001419\/SG\/14384 Appeal No. CIC\/SM\/A\/2010\/001419\/SG Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal: Appellant : Harish Kumar Yadav Dr. Ambedkar Road Nellikunji, Kasargod- 671121 Kerala Respondent […]<\/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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-07T12:32:01+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-07T12:32:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":853,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\",\"name\":\"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-07T12:32:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-07T12:32:01+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-07T12:32:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011"},"wordCount":853,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011","name":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-07T12:32:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-harish-k-p-vs-syndicate-bank-on-5-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri.Harish K P vs Syndicate Bank on 5 September, 2011"}]},{"@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\/25471","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=25471"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25471\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25471"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25471"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25471"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}