{"id":27362,"date":"2009-04-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009"},"modified":"2016-11-18T12:47:19","modified_gmt":"2016-11-18T07:17:19","slug":"smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP.No. 38301 of 2002(I)\n\n\n1. SMT.A.BABY, SENIOR CLERK,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE CHAIRMAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE SECRETARY & LAISON OFFICER FOR\n\n3. SMT.S.REMA DEVI, ASSISTANT,\n\n4. UNION OF INDIA,\n\n5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PERS),\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.C.S.ABDUL SAMMAD, ADDL.CGSC\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :03\/04\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                                S. Siri Jagan, J.\n                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n                           O.P. No. 38301 of 2002\n                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n                      Dated this, the 3rd April, 2009.\n\n                               J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner is an employee of the Marine Products Export<\/p>\n
Development Authority, which is admittedly a State or other authority<\/p>\n
coming within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India,<\/p>\n
against which a writ petition under Article is maintainable. The<\/p>\n
petitioner seeks the following reliefs:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      “a)    Call   for   the  records   of   reservation  of   Scheduled
\n      Caste\/Scheduled Tribe candidates to the post of Assistants in the
\n      Marine Products Export Development Authority;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      b)     To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the
\n      MPEDA to prepare and maintain a roster showing vacancies for
\n      reservation for SC\/ST candidates for promotion to the post of
\n      Assistants;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      c)     To direct the MPEDA to promote the petitioner as Assistant
\n      in the vacancy created due to the promotion of Smt. T. Priyamvada;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      d)     To declare that the post vacated by Smt. T. Priyamvada is a
\n      reserved post for Scheduled Caste and that the third respondent is
\n      not eligible for promotion to the said post;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      e)     For any other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may
\n      deem just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the
\n      case;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      f)     To call for the records leading to Ext. P 12 and to quash the
\n      same by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      g)     To call for the vacancy based roster and post based roster
\n      kept by the administration for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe
\n      for the purpose of promotion to Assistants and Technical Assistants
\n      post and also the general seniority and vacancy position during the
\n      pendency of the O.P;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      h)      To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ,
\n      order or direction directing the respondents 1 & 2 to promote the
\n      petitioner as Assistant in the vacancy reserved for the Scheduled
\n      Caste w.e.f. 01\/12\/1994;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      i)     To issue a writ of mandamus or        other appropriate writ,
\n      order or direction directing the respondents 1 & 2 to promote the
\n      petitioner as Assistant in the carried forward post of reserved for<\/p>\n
O.P. . No. 38301\/02                   -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
       the Scheduled Caste w.e.f. 13\/11\/1997 in implementation of Ext. P
\n       16 decision of the Authority in the 111th meeting held on
\n       26\/10\/2006;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       j)     To issue a writ of mandamus or        other appropriate writ,
\n       order or direction directing the respondents 1 & 2 to lift the ban
\n       imposed by the 2nd respondent in implementing Ext. P 16 decision
\n       of the Authority as per Ext. P 16(a) and to implement the same
\n       forthwith;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       k)     To issue a writ of mandamus or        other appropriate writ,
\n       direction or order directing the respondents 1 & 2 to grant all the
\n       consequential service benefits including the arrears of salary
\n       accordingly.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       2.    The matter was elaborately heard on 3-2-2009.                 I was<\/p>\n
inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner regarding her<\/p>\n
eligibility for promotion with effect from an anterior date. However,<\/p>\n
at that time, the learned counsel for the MPEDA submitted that since<\/p>\n
Ext. P16 decision of the Authority has only been kept in abeyance by<\/p>\n
Ext. P 16(a), the Authority may be given another chance to take a<\/p>\n
decision on the matter. Therefore, I passed the following order:<\/p>\n
             “In this original petition the petitioner stakes a claim for
\n       promotion to the post of Assistant in the Marine Products Export
\n       Development Authority with effect from 13.11.1997 in a roster
\n       point vacancy, which, according to the petitioner, should have
\n       gone to a Scheduled Caste candidate and the petitioner is the
\n       senior most Scheduled Caste candidate in service entitled to be
\n       promoted in that vacancy. According to the petitioner, prior to
\n       2.7.1997 the application of reservation was vacancy based in the
\n       sense that vacancies arising should be filled up on the basis of the
\n       40 point roster. According to the petitioner, going by the same, the
\n       seventh vacancy should have been filled up by a Scheduled Caste
\n       candidate and the petitioner was the senior most Scheduled Caste
\n       candidate    available.  The     petitioner   submits    that   one
\n       Sri.A.K.Thankappan      was       promoted       on     14.10.1991.
\n       Sri.A.K.Thankappan was a Scheduled Caste candidate.            But,
\n       according to the petitioner, the said Sri.A.K.Thankappan was not
\n       promoted in a roster point applicable to a Scheduled Caste
\n       candidate, but to an unreserved vacancy in accordance with his
\n       regular seniority. The petitioner would contend that this is clear
\n       from the fact that one Smt.T.Priyamvada who was an unreserved
\n       candidate, and   Sri.A.K.Thankappan were promoted on the same<\/p>\n
O.P. . No. 38301\/02                    -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
       date viz., 14.10.1991. The petitioner points out that in the counter
\n       affidavit   the    contention   of    the  respondents     is   that
\n       Sri.A.K.Thankappan was accommodated against a carry-forward
\n       reserved vacancy earmarked for a Scheduled Caste candidate. If
\n       that be so, after       Sri.A.K.Thankappan became eligible for
\n       promotion, the first vacancy should have been filled up by
\n       promoting Sri.A.K.Thankappan in the carry-forward vacancy in the
\n       Scheduled Caste quota and when two vacancies arose on
\n       14.10.1991, the first vacancy should have been filled up by
\n       promoting Sri.A.K.Thankappan in the Scheduled Caste vacancy
\n       and then only Smt.T.Priyamvada could have been promoted. But
\n       both in the seniority list of Senior Clerk and that of Assistant,
\n       Smt.T.Priyamvada is shown as senior to the Sri.A.K.Thankappan.
\n       Therefore, clearly     the promotion of Sri.A.K.Thankappan on
\n       14.10.1991 was not in a vacancy reserved for Scheduled Caste,
\n       but in a carry-forward vacancy in accordance with the seniority
\n       position of Sri.A.K.Thankappan. If that be so, the carry-forward
\n       vacancy made mention of in the counter affidavit was still available
\n       to be accommodated by a Scheduled Caste candidate. After
\n       Sri.A.K.Thankappan the petitioner is the senior most SC candidate.
\n       Therefore, the petitioner was the rightful claimant for the post
\n       which vacancy arose after the petitioner become qualified for
\n       promotion in so far as admittedly the carry-forward vacancy was
\n       available all through out.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              2.     Subsequent to the filing of the counter affidavit in
\n       this writ petition there was a further development in so far as the
\n       MPEDA themselves appear to have recognised the claim of the
\n       petitioner in Ext.P34 Note placed before the Authority proposing
\n       to promote the petitioner with effect from 13.11.1997. As per
\n       Exts.P16 proceedings that Note was approved by the Authority
\n       and it was decided to promote the petitioner retrospectively with
\n       effect from     13.11.1997. But strangely without assigning any
\n       reason, by Ext.P16(a), Ext.P16 decision of the Authority was kept
\n       in abeyance. No reason whatsoever is mentioned for the same. In
\n       view of the above circumstances, I am of opinion that the Authority
\n       should take a decision on this point in so far as they have not yet
\n       cancelled Ext.P16 decision, but only kept it in abeyance. In the
\n       above circumstances, I direct the Authority to take a final decision
\n       in the matter in its next meeting. If there is no likelihood of a
\n       meeting of the Authority being convened in the regular course
\n       within two weeks, then a special meeting shall be constituted for
\n       this purpose.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       3. Ext. P16 is dated 26-10-2006. Ext. P16(a) is dated 23-7-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
2007.     More than 1 = years have gone by.               In spite of granting<\/p>\n
sufficient time, the respondents are not able to take a decision. They<\/p>\n
now seek further time. I am not inclined to grant further time. In any<\/p>\n
O.P. . No. 38301\/02              -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
event, since I have already considered the contentions            of the<\/p>\n
petitioner and the respondents in detail and have come to the<\/p>\n
conclusion that the petitioner is eligible for the promotion she has<\/p>\n
claimed, I am inclined to allow the original petition. Accordingly, the<\/p>\n
original petition is allowed.\n<\/p>\n
       Since the MPEDA themselves have, by Ext. P16, decided to<\/p>\n
promote the petitioner with effect from 13-11-1997, I direct that such<\/p>\n
promotion shall be with effect from that date. The petitioner shall<\/p>\n
also be eligible all monetary benefits arising therefrom. Orders in this<\/p>\n
regard shall be passed and arrears disbursed, as expeditiously as<\/p>\n
possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a<\/p>\n
copy of this judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                     Sd\/-      S. Siri Jagan, Judge.\n\nTds\/\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP.No. 38301 of 2002(I) 1. SMT.A.BABY, SENIOR CLERK, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE CHAIRMAN, … Respondent 2. THE SECRETARY & LAISON OFFICER FOR 3. SMT.S.REMA DEVI, ASSISTANT, 4. UNION OF INDIA, 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PERS), […]<\/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-27362","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - 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\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-18T07:17:19+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-18T07:17:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1341,\"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\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-18T07:17:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - 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\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-18T07:17:19+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-18T07:17:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009"},"wordCount":1341,"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\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009","name":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-18T07:17:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-a-baby-vs-the-chairman-on-3-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.A.Baby vs The Chairman on 3 April, 2009"}]},{"@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\/27362","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=27362"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27362\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27362"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27362"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27362"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}