{"id":266096,"date":"2008-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008"},"modified":"2015-04-17T07:03:06","modified_gmt":"2015-04-17T01:33:06","slug":"pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Chattisgarh High Court<\/div>\n
Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n             HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR      \n\n\n              Writ Petition (S) No. 1252 of 2005\n\n\n\n\n                   Pyarelal  Dhratlahre\/Lahasee\n                                                  ...Petitioners\n\n\n                            VERSUS\n\n\n               1.    State  of  Madhya  Pradesh\n\n                 2.   Dy. Director\n\n                 3.   The Collector, Bilaspur.\n\n                 4.    The  Sub  Divisional  Officer\n\n                 5.   Assistant District Inspector of\n                      School\/A.D.I.S.\n\n                 6.   Tiwarilal\n                                                     ...Respondents\n\n\n!            Shri P.S. Koshy, Advocate for the petitioner.\n\n^             Smt.   Smita   Ghai,   Panel   Lawyer   for    the\n              State\/respondent No. 1 to 5.\n\n            Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.\n<\/pre>\n
           Dated:18\/08\/2008<\/p>\n
:          Judgement<\/p>\n
           (Passed on this 18th day of August, 2008)<\/p>\n
   1.   The petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the<\/p>\n
        order dated 29.04.1994 (Annexure A\/5) whereby, selection of the<\/p>\n
        petitioner on the post of Junior Assistant Teacher was found as<\/p>\n
        illegal, and in his place, the respondent No. 6 was appointed<\/p>\n
        on the post of Junior Assistant Teacher.  He further challenges<\/p>\n
        the legality of the order dated 06.05.1994 (Annexure A\/6),<\/p>\n
        passed by the Deputy Director, Education, District, Bilaspur,<\/p>\n
        whereby, the selection of the petitioner was cancelled, being<\/p>\n
        erroneous. The petitioner prays for the consequential relief<\/p>\n
        and  grant  of  salary w.e.f. April, 1994  onwards  and<\/p>\n
        regularization of his service in the regular pay scale.<\/p>\n
        Originally, the application was filed before the M.P. State<\/p>\n
        Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, and was numbered as O.A. No.<\/p>\n
        3653 of 1995.  On dissolution of the Tribunal, the matter was<\/p>\n
        transferred to this Court and numbered as above.<\/p>\n
   2.   The  indisputable  facts, in  nutshell,  are  that  the<\/p>\n
        petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant Teacher through<\/p>\n
        selection conducted by the Sub Divisional Officer (for short<\/p>\n
        `SDO’) and the President, Teachers Selection Committee, Lormi.<\/p>\n
        The petitioner was called for interview to be held on 08.02.94<\/p>\n
        pursuant to intimation dated 24.01.94 (Annexure A\/1).  The<\/p>\n
        petitioner was accordingly selected for appointment in Primary<\/p>\n
        School Putkikhurd, Block Pandariya, District, Bilaspur, by<\/p>\n
        order dated 28.02.94 (Annexure A\/2).  The petitioner joined the<\/p>\n
        service on 09.03.94 (Annexure A\/4).  Thereafter, by order dated<\/p>\n
        06.05.94 (Annexure A\/6), the selection of the petitioner was<\/p>\n
        cancelled on the basis of complaint that his selection was<\/p>\n
        erroneous. Thus, this petition.\n<\/p>\n
   3.   Shri  P.S.  Koshy,  learned counsel appearing  for  the<\/p>\n
        petitioner would submit that once the petitioner has been<\/p>\n
        selected and appointed on the post, his services can not be<\/p>\n
        terminated without affording an opportunity of hearing or<\/p>\n
        following principles of natural justice.  The petitioner was<\/p>\n
        not given any opportunity of hearing to put forward his case<\/p>\n
        and no enquiry was held in presence of the petitioner. Thus,<\/p>\n
        the impugned orders dated 29.09.94 (Annexure A\/5) and 06.05.94<\/p>\n
        (Annexure A\/6) are vitiated and deserve to be quashed.<\/p>\n
   4.   Per contra, Smt. Smita Ghai, learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
        the State\/respondent No. 1 to 5 would submit that on the basis<\/p>\n
        of complaint made by Shri Bodhan Singh, Shri Sita Ram Yadav and<\/p>\n
        Shri Inderman, an enquiry committee, comprising of Shri G.S.<\/p>\n
        Dhananjay, Additional Collector, Bilaspur, Shri E. Kujur,<\/p>\n
        Deputy Collector, Deputy Director, Education and Shri Parasar,<\/p>\n
        District Coordinator, was constituted, and in enquiry, it was<\/p>\n
        found that the appointment of the petitioner was illegal as<\/p>\n
        other candidate namely Tiwarilal i.e. respondent No. 6, has<\/p>\n
        obtained more marks than the petitioner. Thus, the select list<\/p>\n
        was cancelled on the ground of being irregular and erroneous,<\/p>\n
        and the respondent No. 6, who obtained more marks, was selected<\/p>\n
        in place of the petitioner.  Thus, the impugned orders dated<\/p>\n
        29.09.94 (Annexure A\/5) and 06.05.94 (Annexure A\/6) are proper<\/p>\n
        and justified.  She would further submit that it was not<\/p>\n
        necessary to issue show cause notice to the petitioner, as for<\/p>\n
        want of opportunity of hearing, the case of the petitioner<\/p>\n
        would not have been prejudiced.  The enquiry committee has<\/p>\n
        examined all the documents and marks obtained by all the<\/p>\n
        candidates, and thereafter the impugned orders were passed.<\/p>\n
        The petition deserves to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
   5.   Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties,<\/p>\n
        after perusing the pleadings and documents appended thereto, it<\/p>\n
        is evident that the petitioner was selected through proper<\/p>\n
        selection conducted by the selection committee. The petitioner<\/p>\n
        was appointed on 28.02.94 (Annexure A\/2). On the basis of<\/p>\n
        complaints made by Shri Bodhan Singh, Shri Sita Ram Yadav and<\/p>\n
        Shri Inderman, the Collector, Bilaspur, constituted a committee<\/p>\n
        as stated above.  The Committee examined the entire selection<\/p>\n
        of the Junior Assistant Teachers in Primary Schools Suretha,<\/p>\n
        Putkikhurd, Baniyakua and Devpura.  In the concerned Primary<\/p>\n
        School i.e. Putkikhurd, it was found that in the interview, the<\/p>\n
        respondent No. 6 secured 62 percent and the petitioner secured<\/p>\n
        51.3 percent.  No application was made from village Putkikhurd<\/p>\n
        as  required that the preference should be given to the<\/p>\n
        residents of concerned Primary School. The petitioner as well<\/p>\n
        as the respondent No. 6 belonged to the neighboring villages<\/p>\n
        i.e. Sagounadih and Bodhipara respectively, within the radius<\/p>\n
        of one kilometer.  Thus, keeping in view the better performance<\/p>\n
        of the respondent No. 6 in the interview, having the similar<\/p>\n
        conditions, was selected and the selection of the petitioner<\/p>\n
        was quashed.  It is not a case where without holding any<\/p>\n
        enquiry, selection of the petitioner has been cancelled.  A<\/p>\n
        detailed enquiry of all the selections conducted by the SDO and<\/p>\n
        the President, Teachers Selection Committee, Lormi, was<\/p>\n
        examined and irregularity and glaring errors were found in all<\/p>\n
        the cases.  Thus, the impugned orders were passed strictly on<\/p>\n
        the basis of merit. The method of selection was marks obtained<\/p>\n
        in interview alone.\n<\/p>\n
   6.   The  order  dated  29.09.94 of the Collector,  Bilaspur<\/p>\n
        (Annexure A\/5), reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
               “2-  dfu”B izkFkfed `kkyk iqrdh[kqnZ  `kkyk
\n               iqrdh[kqnZ  ds dfu”B lgk;d f’k{kd  in  gsrq
\n               ,lkr+  vkosnu izkIr gq,A lfefr us lk{kkRdkj
\n               Hkh  fy;k vkSj 62% vad vftZr djus  okys  Jh
\n               frokjhyky fuoklh xzke cks\/khikjk  ds  LFkku
\n               ij  51-3% vad izkIrdrkZ Jh I;kjsyky  fuoklh
\n               xzke  lxksukMhg dks p;fur fd;k x;k gSA xzke
\n               iqrdh[kqnZ ls dksbZ vkosnu izkIr u gksus ds
\n               dkj.k   fudVorhZ   xzke   cks\/khikjk   rFkk
\n               lxksukMhg tks iqrdh[kqnZ ls yxHkx leku nwjh
\n               vFkkZr  1  fd-eh-  dh  ifjf\/k  esa  gS]  ds
\n               mEehnokjksa ds uke ij lfefr us  fopkj  fd;k
\n               rFkk  I;kjsyky ftldk izkIrkad 51-3% gS  dks
\n               p;fur  fd;k  gS tcfd frokjhyky dk  izkIrkad
\n               62% rFkk fudVorhZ xzke cks\/khikjk dk fuoklh
\n               gS] dk p;u fd;k tkuk pkfg;sA**<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
   7.   In the matter of Viveka Nand Sethi Vs. Chairman, J&K Bank<\/p>\n
        Ltd. and others1, the Supreme Court observed as under :<\/p>\n
               “The  principle of natural justice,  it  is
\n               trite, is no unruly horse.  When facts  are
\n               admitted,  an  enquiry would  be  an  empty
\n               formality.  Even the principle of  estoppel
\n               will apply. [See Gurjeewan Garewal (Dr.) v.
\n               Dr.   Sumitra  Dash<\/a>.]  The  principles   of
\n               natural justice are required to be complied
\n               with  having  regard to the fact  situation
\n               obtaining therein.  It cannot be put  in  a
\n               straitjacket formula.  It cannot be applied
\n               in   a  vaccum  without  reference  to  the
\n               relevant  facts  and circumstances  of  the
\n               case.   (See State of Punjab v. Jagir Singh<\/a>
\n               and Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa<\/a>. ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
   8.   The above ratio was referred with approval in the matter<\/p>\n
        of P.D. Agrawal Vs. State Bank of India and Others2.<\/p>\n
   9.   Applying  the  well  settled  principles  of   law   on<\/p>\n
        applicability of principles of natural justice to the facts of<\/p>\n
        the present case, wherein, the glaring irregularities were writ<\/p>\n
        large in the selection, it was not necessary to afford an<\/p>\n
        opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as the facts are<\/p>\n
        crystal clear as above stated.\n<\/p>\n
   10.  For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petition  is<\/p>\n
        dismissed.  No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                                  JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Chattisgarh High Court Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1252 of 2005 Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee …Petitioners VERSUS 1. State of Madhya Pradesh 2. Dy. Director 3. The Collector, Bilaspur. 4. The Sub Divisional Officer 5. Assistant District Inspector of School\/A.D.I.S. 6. […]<\/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":[12,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-266096","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chattisgarh-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - 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\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-17T01:33:06+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\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\\\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-17T01:33:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1163,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Chattisgarh High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\\\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-17T01:33:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\\\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - 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\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-17T01:33:06+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\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-17T01:33:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008"},"wordCount":1163,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Chattisgarh High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008","name":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-17T01:33:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pyarelal-dhratlahrelahasee-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pyarelal Dhratlahre\/Lahasee vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2008"}]},{"@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\/266096","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=266096"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266096\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=266096"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=266096"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=266096"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}