{"id":26985,"date":"1999-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1999-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999"},"modified":"2018-01-12T02:30:51","modified_gmt":"2018-01-11T21:00:51","slug":"behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","title":{"rendered":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1999 VAD Delhi 823, 81 (1999) DLT 391<\/div>\n
Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n
Bench: A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
A.K. Sikri, J.<\/p>\n
1.
\n     This  writ  petition was filed in the year 1983. Rule  was  issued  on 23.2.84.  Petitioner had filed CM.1462\/99 for early hearing. This  application  was  allowed vide order dated 19.2.99 and matter was directed  to  be listed for final hearing on 17.5.99 at the end of the list in “After Notice Misc.  Matters”.  It was also directed that written  submissions  be  filed within four weeks. On 17.5.99 the case was adjourned for 16.7.99. When case came up for hearing there was no representation on behalf of the respondent although  the  matter was called out twice. Written submissions  have  been
\nfiled  by the petitioner but respondent has not filed any  written  submissions.  As  noted at subsequent stages, the matter is  short  and  involves dispute  of petty nature. Petitioner is about 80 years of ages and,  therefore, it is not proper to keep the matter pending. Accordingly, counsel for the petitioner was heard.\n<\/p>\n
2.   The petitioner retired as Office Superintendent in the Ordnance Depot, Ministry of defense, Shakurabasti, Delhi in March, 1977 on attaining superannuation. It is the case of the petitioner that due to economic  difficulties  he took up employment as Canteen Superintendent w.e.f. 12.12.78  vide letter  No. 3988\/K\/ADM dated 12.12.78. A perusal of letter  dated  12.12.78 would  show  that he was appointed on casual basis for a  period  of  three months  in  the first instance which was continued even thereafter.  It  is further  stipulated  that he would be required to carry out duties  as  per “standing orders of workers Canteen” and entrusted by OI\/C Workers  Canteen from  time to time. Thus it is the case of the petitioner that as  per  his appointment  letter he was governed by standing orders of workers  canteen. Rule 20 of the said standing orders is reproduced:\n<\/p>\n
     20.  “Canteen employees will continue to serve till the age of 62 years subject to fitness for work. They may, however, be  granted  extension to the maximum extent of three years subject to fitness  medically and functionally.\n<\/p>\n
     (Adm. Branch letter No. 3988\/P\/ADM dated 09 June, 78)”.\n<\/p>\n
3.   As  per  aforesaid  Rule he could continue till the age  of  62  years subject  to  fitness and thereafter he could be granted  extension  to  the maximum extent of three years subject to fitness medically and  functionally.  The  petitioner continued to work pursuant to  his  appointment  order dated 12.12.78 even after three months and completed the age of 62 years on 9.3.81.  The  respondent granted him extension for further three  years  in terms  Rule  20  (Supra) vide Daily Order Part-II  No.  3\/Canteen\/81  dated 16.3.81. w.e.f. 10.3.81. The relevant portion of Order dated 16.3.81  reads
\nas under:\n<\/p>\n
     “Having  attained  the age of 62 years on 10 March,  81,  granted extension of service for further 3 years i.e. upto the age of  65 years being medically and functionally fit.”\n<\/p>\n
4.   While  the petitioner was performing the duties,  communication  dated 25.7.81 was issued by Ministry of defense, Govt. of India, consequent  upon the  judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court declaring all employees  of  canteen established in defense Industrial installations to be Government  employees with  immediate effect. Para-3 of the said communication being relevant  is reproduced below:\n<\/p>\n
     “Till Government decides otherwise the employees of the statutory  canteens will continue to be governed by the terms and conditions  of service laid down in their appointment letters or contracts of  employment already subsisting. They will continue to be paid  the same emoluments to which they are entitled at present.”\n<\/p>\n
5.   Vide communication dated 9.12.81 the date from which the employees  of canteen were to became Government employees was changed to 22.10.80. Thereafter, all canteen employees were given new pay scales w.e.f. 22.10.80 vide letter  dated  21.9.82  of the Ministry of defense,  Government  of  India. However, it is contended by the petitioner that he was continued to be paid at old pay scale as his employment continued to be governed by his appointment letter in terms of Para-3 of the order dated 25.7.81.\n<\/p>\n
6.   The contention of the petitioner is that in terms of Para-3 of  communication\/order  dated 25.7.81 he continued to be governed by the terms  and conditions  of his appointment letter and the appointment letter  mentioned
\nthat  he would be governed by standing orders and standing orders  directed the  age  of retirement at 62 subject to further extension of  three  years which was granted in the case of the petitioner. Therefore, he argues  that he  had a right to continue in service till he attains the age of 65  years i.e. till 9.3.84. It is the case of the petitioner that at no point of time he  was  treated  as Government servant as he was  given  extension  w.e.f. 10.3.81 after he attained the age of 62 years and was being paid at old pay scale.  However, a clarification was sought from Ministry of defense as  to
\nwhether  extension of service of Supervisory Staff beyond 58 years  of  age would  be  in  order. In response, Ministry of  defense  vide  order  dated 25.3.82 mentioned that in terms of Ministry’s letter dated 25.7.81  pending further  orders these employees should be governed by the terms and  conditions  of their present employment. In spite of this position, even  clarified  by the Ministry of defense vide order dated 25.3.82, the services  of the  petitioner were abruptly terminated w.e.f. 2.2.83.  Petitioner  served legal  notice but since no favourable response was given he  filed  present writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
7.   The facts as enumerated above would clearly show that after the  petitioner  was given extensions of three years w.e.f. 10.3.81 he had right  to continue  in  service up to the age of 65 years. Even  in  extension  order dated  16.3.81 it was clearly mentioned that the extension was granted  for further  period  of three years i.e. up to the age of 65 years  as  he  was found  medically  and functionally fit. Since as  per  communication  dated 25.7.81,  while treating such canteen employees as Government employees  it was  clearly  mentioned  that till the Government  decides  otherwise  such employees  would  continue to be governed by the terms  and  conditions  of service  laid  down in their appointment letter, petitioner  had  right  to continue  up to the age of 65 years i.e. up to 9.3.84. Accordingly, I  hold that termination of services of the petitioner w.e.f. 2.2.83 is illegal.\n<\/p>\n
8.   In  the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, it is  stated  that the  writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner had  unequivocally stated  in  his letters dated 3.3.83 and 11.4.83, that he  had  decided  to close  the chapter which arose due to his termination orders. Therefore  he was estopped from filing the writ petition challenging the order of  termination.  Petitioner has explained the circumstances in which these  letters were written. According to the petitioner, after he got legal notice  dated 23.2.83 issued to the respondent for withdrawal of termination order  dated 2.2.83,  he  was called to the Office of the respondent on 3.3.83  and  was pressurized  not to pursue the case against his termination and was  misled into  believing  that  he would be given the benefit of  earned  leave  and gratuity. He has filed additional affidavit as Annexure-1 explaining  these circumstances  in  detail. According to him without  settling  the  dispute
\nrelating to the illegal termination of the services of the petitioner,  the respondent informed vide letter dated 9.3.83 of their decision to close the matter.  On the other hand, the petitioner was told that as per the  rules, he  could not be paid the benefit of earned leave and gratuity.  The  petitioner  thus wrote letter dated 12.3.83 to the respondent  withdrawing  his letter  of 3.3.83. The petitioner’s demand for withdrawing the  termination order  was reiterated by letter dated 16.3.83. of his advocate to  the  respondent.  Thereafter  the petitioner was offered a job  in  the  officer’s mess\/CSD  (i)  Canteen as an accounts clerk and persuaded to  withdraw  his notice. In view of these assurances given by the respondent, the petitioner who  was undergoing grave financial hardship wrote letter dated 11.4.83  to the  respondent  for  settling the dispute. No reply was  received  by  the petitioner  to his above mentioned letter and neither were any steps  taken
\nby the respondent for setting the dispute. The petitioner vide letter dated 30.4.83  withdrew his earlier letter dated 11.4.83 offering to  settle  the dispute amicably.\n<\/p>\n
9.   In view of the aforesaid and particularly when the matter was filed in 1983, after a period of 16 years, it will not be appropriate to dismiss the petition of the petitioner on the ground that he had written letters deciding  to  close the chapter regarding his termination when  he  specifically withdrew those letters. Moreover, as mentioned above, the matter relates to the  payment  of  salary to the petitioner for a period  from  2.2.83  till 9.3.84 and the petitioner should be 80 years of age now, Therefore, once it is found that petitioner was entitled to work up to the age of 65 years and
\nhis  termination  was illegal it would not be appropriate to  non-suit  the petitioner on such hyper-technical grounds.\n<\/p>\n
10.  Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. Respondents  are  directed to pay the petitioner salary for the period  2.2.83  to 9.3.84  treating  him in service till 9.3.84. The respondents  are  further directed  to pay interest on this amount at the rate of 9% P. A. The  petitioner  further informs that he had deposited a sum of Rs. 500\/- by way  of security  at  the time of his employment which is also not  refunded.  This amount be also paid to the petitioner. Petitioner would also be entitled to cost of this petition quantified at Rs. 2,000\/-. The aforesaid benefits  be
\npaid  to  the  petitioner within a period of two months from  the  date  of receipt of communication of this order.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999 Equivalent citations: 1999 VAD Delhi 823, 81 (1999) DLT 391 Author: A Sikri Bench: A Sikri ORDER A.K. Sikri, J. 1. This writ petition was filed in the year 1983. Rule was issued on 23.2.84. Petitioner had filed CM.1462\/99 for […]<\/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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26985","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBehari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - 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\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\" \/>\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=\"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-11T21:00:51+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\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999\",\"datePublished\":\"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-11T21:00:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\"},\"wordCount\":1590,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\",\"name\":\"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-11T21:00:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999\"}]},{\"@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":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - 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\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-11T21:00:51+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\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999","datePublished":"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-11T21:00:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999"},"wordCount":1590,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999","name":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, ... on 23 July, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1999-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-11T21:00:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/behari-lal-vs-the-commandant-ordnance-depot-on-23-july-1999#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Behari Lal vs The Commandant, Ordnance Depot, … on 23 July, 1999"}]},{"@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\/26985","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=26985"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26985\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26985"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}