{"id":28604,"date":"2009-10-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009"},"modified":"2019-01-11T00:14:31","modified_gmt":"2019-01-10T18:44:31","slug":"abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWA.No. 2128 of 2009()\n\n\n1. ABDULRAHMAN.T.M.,AGED 21 YEARS\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR\n\n Dated :30\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n             KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.\n                   ---------------------------------------------\n                          W.A. NO. 2128 OF 2009\n                   ---------------------------------------------\n                  Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009\n\n\n                                 JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Ravikumar, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      The appellant was the petitioner.             He was an applicant for<\/p>\n
appointment to the post of Police Constable in the Armed Police Battalion<\/p>\n
in Ernakulam District. In connection with the selection process, he was<\/p>\n
called upon to appear for the physical efficiency test on 18.5.2009. In<\/p>\n
order to earn a place in the list of qualified candidates in the physical<\/p>\n
efficiency test, one has to qualify in five items out of eight. According to<\/p>\n
the respondent, the petitioner, though participated in all the eight items,<\/p>\n
had cleared only in four items, namely 100 metres run, High Jump, Long<\/p>\n
Jump and Pull up. But, according to the petitioner, besides clearing the<\/p>\n
aforesaid items, he had cleared the minimum qualifying distance in ‘Shot<\/p>\n
put’in his third attempt. It is his case that after clearing the said<\/p>\n
minimum qualifying distance, he fell down due to muscle pull and<\/p>\n
consequently he was declared as failed in respect of the said event. This,<\/p>\n
W.A.NO. 2128\/2009                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
according to the appellant, is illegal and, therefore, he sought for issuance<\/p>\n
of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to consider Ext.P2, his<\/p>\n
representation dated 25.5.2009, requesting for granting another chance to<\/p>\n
participate in the said item, rather putting the shot, and to consider his<\/p>\n
performance afresh for selection to the post of Police Constable.<\/p>\n
      2.   The respondent herein has filed a counter affidavit and an<\/p>\n
additional counter affidavit in the Writ Petition refuting the claims and<\/p>\n
contentions of the appellant. According to the respondent, the appellant<\/p>\n
had participated in all the eight items, but had cleared only in the aforesaid<\/p>\n
four items. As regards ‘shot put’ he had failed to qualify in all his three<\/p>\n
attempts. It was after considering the contentions and on perusing the<\/p>\n
original of the result sheet that the learned Single Judge arrived at the<\/p>\n
conclusion that the case of the appellant\/petitioner that he had qualified in<\/p>\n
the item “shot put” is unbelievable and accordingly dismissed the Writ<\/p>\n
Petition. This appeal is preferred against the said judgment.<\/p>\n
      3. Both parties have reiterated their contentions which were raised<\/p>\n
before the learned Single Judge. As noticed hereinbefore, the contention<\/p>\n
of the appellant is that he had cleared the minimum qualifying distance in<\/p>\n
respect of the item “shot put” and he fell down only thereafter and,<\/p>\n
W.A.NO. 2128\/2009                       3<\/span><\/p>\n
therefore, there was no reason to disqualify him, rather to declare him as<\/p>\n
failed, in respect of that item. The specific contention of the respondent is<\/p>\n
that the appellant had failed to qualify in the said item. In the context of<\/p>\n
the rival contentions, Ext.P2 itself assumes relevance. There was no<\/p>\n
immediate response on the part on the appellant after his disqualification.<\/p>\n
He had submitted Ext.P2 representation only on 25.5.2009. His own<\/p>\n
version of the incident in Ext.P2 is as follows:<\/p>\n
                    “In all the above items I participated and
\n              got myself declared pass in 100 mtr.runs, high
\n              jump, long jump, pull up. In putting the shot
\n              though I crossed the mark, due to muscle pull, I
\n              got fell down in the line and the result declared as
\n              passed was further declared as foul.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                        (emphasis supplied)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
      4. Thus, going by the very version of the incident, admittedly,<\/p>\n
while putting the shot, the appellant had crossed the mark due to muscle<\/p>\n
pull. Whatever by the reason, such a throw cannot be styled as a legal<\/p>\n
throw and he cannot, therefore, claim that the said attempt should be taken<\/p>\n
as a legal one and he should be declared as passed in the said item merely<\/p>\n
because he had cleared the minimum qualifying distance. Based on the<\/p>\n
very admission on the part of the appellant\/petitioner and the way in<\/p>\n
which he described the incident, no one can attribute any kind of illegality<\/p>\n
W.A.NO. 2128\/2009                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
in the action on the part of the respondent in declaring him as failed in that<\/p>\n
attempt in respect of the said item. Admittedly, he had failed in respect of<\/p>\n
that item in the other two attempts as well.    To be a valid throw in ‘shot<\/p>\n
put’, the shot putter should not cross the mark in that process. Therefore,<\/p>\n
the appellant was only to be declared as failed in respect of the said item<\/p>\n
based on his own admission that he had crossed the mark while putting the<\/p>\n
shot. That alone was done by the respondent. However, on account of the<\/p>\n
persuasive assertion on behalf of the appellant, we had directed for<\/p>\n
production of the original result sheet pertaining to the appellant in<\/p>\n
connection with the physical efficiency test held on 18.5.2009.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Accordingly, the result sheet was produced. We have carefully perused<\/p>\n
the same. The result sheet would reveal that the appellant had      failed in<\/p>\n
all his three attempts in regard to the item “shot put” and that he had<\/p>\n
participated in all the eight items and came out successful only in respect<\/p>\n
of four items, namely, 100 metres run, high jump, long jump and pull up.<\/p>\n
We are unable to find any kind of irregularity in the original result sheet<\/p>\n
produced by the respondent. Therefore, there is no reason to disagree with<\/p>\n
the finding of the learned Single Judge that the inconsistent case of the<\/p>\n
appellant\/petitioner cannot be believed and there is no merit in the case set<\/p>\n
out by him.\n<\/p>\n
W.A.NO. 2128\/2009                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
     The appeal is, therefore, devoid of merits and it is liable to be<\/p>\n
dismissed. We do so.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                 (KURIAN JOSEPH)
\n                                        JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                 (C.T. RAVIKUMAR)
\n                                         JUDGE<\/p>\n
sp\/<\/p>\n
W.A.NO. 2128\/2009    6<\/span><\/p>\n
                        KURIAN JOSEPH
\n                                  &
\n                        C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.\n<\/p>\n
                        W.A.NO. 2128\/2009<\/p>\n
                        JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
                        30th October, 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WA.No. 2128 of 2009() 1. ABDULRAHMAN.T.M.,AGED 21 YEARS … Petitioner Vs 1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH The Hon’ble MR. Justice […]<\/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-28604","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAbdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 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\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-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=\"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-10T18:44:31+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\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-10T18:44:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":941,\"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\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-10T18:44:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 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":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 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\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-10T18:44:31+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\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-10T18:44:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009"},"wordCount":941,"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\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009","name":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-10T18:44:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrahman-t-m-vs-the-district-officer-on-30-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Abdulrahman.T.M. vs The District Officer on 30 October, 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\/28604","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=28604"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28604\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28604"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28604"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28604"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}