{"id":262822,"date":"2010-09-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7"},"modified":"2018-02-24T13:20:22","modified_gmt":"2018-02-24T07:50:22","slug":"v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","title":{"rendered":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 7130 of 2005(W)\n\n\n1. V. SURESHLAL, LINEMAN GRADE-I,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE DY.CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) KERALA\n\n3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,\n\n4. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN\n\n                For Respondent  :.\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :24\/09\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                        S. SIRI JAGAN, J.\n                  ------------------------------\n                   W.P.(C) No.7130 OF 2005\n                  -------------------------------\n         Dated this the 24th day of September, 2010\n\n                        J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner is Lineman Gr.I in the services of the Kerala<\/p>\n
State Electricity Bord.     While he was working as Electricity<\/p>\n
Worker, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by<\/p>\n
issuing Ext.P1 charge memo. The petitioner denied the charges.<\/p>\n
An enquiry was conducted. By Ext.P3 enquiry report, the enquiry<\/p>\n
officer found the petitioner guilty of one charge out of three<\/p>\n
charges. By Ext.P4 show cause notice, the disciplinary authority<\/p>\n
found the petitioner guilty of the third charge also without going<\/p>\n
the petitioner any notice to show cause why the disciplinary<\/p>\n
authority should not differ from the findings of the enquiry officer<\/p>\n
on charge 3 with reasons in support thereof and directed him to<\/p>\n
show cause why the punishment of barring of three increments<\/p>\n
with cumulative effect should not be imposed on him.       Despite<\/p>\n
Ext.P5 reply filed by the petitioner, by Ext.P6 order, that<\/p>\n
punishment was confirmed.       The petitioner filed Ext.P7 appeal<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
before the appellate authority along with Ext.P7(a) petition to<\/p>\n
condone the delay. That was rejected by Ext.P8 order on the<\/p>\n
ground that the appeal filed, does not conform to regulations<\/p>\n
28 and 38 of Kerala State Electricity Board Employees’ CCA<\/p>\n
Regulations. The petitioner is challenging EXts.P1, P6 and P8<\/p>\n
in this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    The petitioner raises several contentions.      First is<\/p>\n
that the enquiry is vitiated for violation of principles of natural<\/p>\n
justice.       According to him, the petitioner had sought<\/p>\n
production of certain documents, which was refused to be<\/p>\n
produced on the ground that they were lost. Secondly, the<\/p>\n
petitioner wanted the Board to produce certain witnesses who<\/p>\n
are the employees of the Board, which was not considered. A<\/p>\n
further contention of the petitioner is that the enquriy officer<\/p>\n
found the petitioner guilty of only one charge, whereas the<\/p>\n
disciplinary authority has, without any notice to the petitioner<\/p>\n
regarding disagreement with the conclusions of the enquiry<\/p>\n
officer, straight away found the petitioner guilty of another<\/p>\n
misconduct also, which is against settled legal position. The<\/p>\n
petitioner would further contend that in any event, the<\/p>\n
petitioner was not guilty of the misconduct found proved by<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05                3<\/span><\/p>\n
the enquiry officer also.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    No counter affidavit has been filed by the<\/p>\n
respondents.     But the learned Standing Counsel for the<\/p>\n
Electricity Board seeks to justify the impugned orders on the<\/p>\n
basis of the documents on record.\n<\/p>\n
      4.    I have considered the rival contentions in detail.<\/p>\n
There is substance in the contention of the petitioner that in<\/p>\n
view of the regulations applicable, which stipulate that when<\/p>\n
witnesses, who are the employees of the Board are cited, the<\/p>\n
Board shall cause to produce the same.           So also there is<\/p>\n
merit in the contention of the petitioner that the enquiry is<\/p>\n
vitiated for non-production of the documents called for. But in<\/p>\n
view of the fact that I am satisfied that the petitioner is not<\/p>\n
guilty of any misconduct, I am not going into these contentions<\/p>\n
in detail.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    By Ext.P1 charge memo, the petitioner was charged<\/p>\n
with three misconducts which are:\n<\/p>\n
             (1)  the petitioner while working at Nellila<\/p>\n
       Station as Electricity Worker refused to take cut off<\/p>\n
       readings in connection with introduction of spot billing<\/p>\n
       system.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05                  4<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
              (2)  the petitioner marked attendance without<\/p>\n
       doing the assigned job.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              (3)  the petitioner betrayed the Brand by giving<\/p>\n
       false information that the delinquent is unable to do the<\/p>\n
       duty of a workman being medically fit.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The enquiry officer has found the petitioner not guilty of<\/p>\n
charge numbers 2 and 3.            As far as the first charge is<\/p>\n
concerned, it is not in dispute before me that the duty which<\/p>\n
the petitioner refused to do was taking meter reading for the<\/p>\n
purpose of spot billing. Evidently, that is the duty of the Meter<\/p>\n
Readers. The contention of the respondents is that since the<\/p>\n
Meter Readers were in short supply, the Electricity Workers<\/p>\n
were directed to do the work. But it is more or less clear that<\/p>\n
the same was not part of the duties of an Electricity worker.<\/p>\n
This is clear from the fact that about a week after initiating the<\/p>\n
disciplinary proceedings, the Board issued a Circular to the<\/p>\n
effect that only willing Electricity Workers shall be compelled to<\/p>\n
do the work of meter reading. This would go to show that the<\/p>\n
meter reading was not part of the duties of the Electricity<\/p>\n
Worker.     If that is not part of the duties of the Electricity<\/p>\n
Worker, the petitioner could not have been compelled to do<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
the work of meter reading and he cannot be proceeded against<\/p>\n
for not doing that work, in so far as he is expected to do only<\/p>\n
the work of Electricity Worker.    Therefore, the finding of the<\/p>\n
enquiry officer that the petitioner is guilty of the first charge is<\/p>\n
patently perverse and on that ground the enquiry itself is<\/p>\n
vitiated.\n<\/p>\n
      6.    As far as the other charges are concerned, when the<\/p>\n
enquiry officer himself found the petitioner not guilty of those<\/p>\n
charges, the disciplinary authority could not have without<\/p>\n
following the procedure prescribed like giving notice for<\/p>\n
disagreement to the petitioner with reasons for disagreement<\/p>\n
and hearing him, found the petitioner guilty of the other<\/p>\n
misconducts.      Therefore, the finding of the disciplinary<\/p>\n
authority that the petitioner is guilty of the third charge also is<\/p>\n
clearly unsustainable. Even otherwise the enquiry officer has<\/p>\n
given very cogent reasons for finding the petitioner not guilty<\/p>\n
of that charge.    Even in his order, the disciplinary authority<\/p>\n
has not stated as to on what basis he found the petitioner<\/p>\n
guilty of that misconduct. From the above discussion, it is<\/p>\n
clear that the petitioner could not have been found guilty of<\/p>\n
any misconduct as per the charge sheet.         Consequently, the<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
impugned orders are unsustainable.        Accordingly, they are<\/p>\n
quashed.\n<\/p>\n
      The writ petition is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                                    S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
acd<\/p>\n
W.P.(c)No.7130\/05    7<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 7130 of 2005(W) 1. V. SURESHLAL, LINEMAN GRADE-I, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE DY.CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL … Respondent 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) KERALA 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 4. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-262822","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - 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\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-24T07:50:22+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\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-24T07:50:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\"},\"wordCount\":998,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\",\"name\":\"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-24T07:50:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 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":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - 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\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-24T07:50:22+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\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-24T07:50:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7"},"wordCount":998,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7","name":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-24T07:50:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-sureshlal-vs-the-dy-chief-engineer-on-24-september-2010-7#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V. Sureshlal vs The Dy.Chief Engineer on 24 September, 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\/262822","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=262822"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262822\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=262822"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=262822"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=262822"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}