{"id":30791,"date":"2007-05-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-05-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007"},"modified":"2016-09-02T20:33:36","modified_gmt":"2016-09-02T15:03:36","slug":"devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","title":{"rendered":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Reddy<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Tarun Chatterjee, B. Sudershan Reddy<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2450 of 2007\n\nPETITIONER:\nDevendra Singh &amp; Ors\n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of U.P. &amp; Ors\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 11\/05\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nTarun Chatterjee &amp; B. Sudershan Reddy\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T <\/p>\n<p>CIVIL APPEAL NO. \t2450\tOF 2007<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP(c) No.  16232 of 2004)<br \/>\nWith<br \/>\nCIVIL APPEAL NO. \t2448\tOF 2007<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP(c) No.  26109 of 2004)<\/p>\n<p>B.SUDERSHAN REDDY,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThese appeals have been preferred against the<br \/>\ncommon judgment and order of the Allahabad High<br \/>\nCourt   dated 14.5.2004 passed in Special Appeal No.<br \/>\n461 of 2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tWe have elaborately heard the learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe parties and perused the impugned judgment and the<br \/>\nmaterial made available on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe facts leading to filing of these appeals are not<br \/>\nrequired to be noticed in detail for a very short and<br \/>\nsimple question falls for consideration viz. as to whether<br \/>\nthe authorities were right in not selecting the appellants<br \/>\nto undergo B.T.C. Training Course, 2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe State of Uttar Pradesh as a measure of policy<br \/>\ndecision has decided to arrange the Special BTC Training<br \/>\nCourse for a period of six months to as many as 46,189<br \/>\ncandidates possessing B.Ed.\/L.T. course. The National<br \/>\nTeachers Education Board accorded its approval to the<br \/>\nproposal submitted by the State of Uttar Pradesh for<br \/>\narranging the Special BTC Training Course for a period<br \/>\nof 6 months to all those candidates with a requisite<br \/>\nqualification of B.Ed.\/L.T. course. The Government order<br \/>\ndated 14.1.2004 makes it abundantly clear it is a Special<br \/>\nBTC Training Course, 2004 which is a programme of<br \/>\ntraining for six months, including a three months<br \/>\npractical schedule and in no manner deals with any<br \/>\nselection and appointment of Assistant Teachers in the<br \/>\nBasic Schools run by the U.P. Basic Education Board in<br \/>\nthe State of Uttar Pradesh. Be it noted that none of the<br \/>\nappellants in these appeals could secure admission to<br \/>\nSpecial BTC Training Course, 2004.  Their case is that<br \/>\nthey should be given preference in admission to Special<br \/>\nBTC Course inasmuch as they had already appeared for<br \/>\nselections in Special BTC Course, 2001.  Their further<br \/>\ncase is that the appointments should be made on the<br \/>\nbasis of year wise training course passed by the<br \/>\ncandidates, and the candidates who had passed the<br \/>\nrequired training course earlier be placed above  than<br \/>\nthose who had passed the training later.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn order to resolve the controversy it is just and<br \/>\nnecessary to notice the salient features of the policy<br \/>\ndecision of the Government of Uttar Pradesh dated<br \/>\n14.1.2004.  It is clear from a bare reading of the policy<br \/>\nthat the Government had resolved to arrange the<br \/>\nSpecial BTC Training Course spread over a period of six<br \/>\nmonths to all those 46,189 B.Ed.\/L.T. qualified<br \/>\ncandidates. The selection is for the purposes of<br \/>\nimparting training and not recruitment into any service<br \/>\nas such.  Only such candidates who completed their<br \/>\ntraining of B.Ed.\/L.T. as regular students  in universities<br \/>\nrecognized by the National Teachers Education Board,<br \/>\nrecognized colleges and training institutes conducted by<br \/>\nthe State Government\/Central Government alone were<br \/>\neligible for the selection into the course.  The policy<br \/>\nprovides the age of the applicant must be minimum of<br \/>\n16 years  and not more than 35 years as on 1st July,<br \/>\n2004.  However, some relaxation has been made in<br \/>\nfavour of scheduled caste, scheduled tribe, backward<br \/>\nclass candidates and others with which we are not<br \/>\nconcerned in this case.  The most important feature of<br \/>\nthe policy is that  a State level merit list is required to<br \/>\nbe prepared on the basis of  percentage of marks<br \/>\nobtained in High School considering the rules regarding<br \/>\nreservation.   The policy directs the payment of stipend<br \/>\nof Rs. 2500\/- per month to the selected candidates for<br \/>\nthe special BTC training  until &#8220;he is duly appointed on<br \/>\nthe post of Assistant Teacher in the basic school after<br \/>\npassing the written and practical examinations<br \/>\nconducted by the Registrar, Departmental Examinations,<br \/>\nUttar Pradesh and obtaining the required certificate,<br \/>\nunder the control of State Council for Education<br \/>\nResearch and Training, on completing the required<br \/>\ntraining in the merit process.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe Government order dated 14.1.2004 was<br \/>\namended vide Government order dated 20.2.2004 even<br \/>\nwhile the writ petition filed by the appellants herein<br \/>\npending before the learned Single Judge.  The<br \/>\namendments made C.P.Ed., B.P. Ed. and D.P.Ed.<br \/>\nqualified candidates also to be eligible along with B.Ed.<br \/>\nand L.T. candidates provided they have taken training as<br \/>\ninstitutional candidates from recognized universities and<br \/>\nthe State colleges, training colleges.  The maximum age<br \/>\nlimit was extended to 40 years  with exemption to<br \/>\nreserved category candidates.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe record discloses that the primary contention of<br \/>\nthe appellants before the learned Single Judge was that<br \/>\nthe maximum age should be 45 years  as provided for in<br \/>\nthe 1998 selections of Special BTC and that those<br \/>\ncandidates who were eligible to appear in the 2001<br \/>\nselections should be given exemptions on the ground<br \/>\nthat National Council had not imposed any restriction<br \/>\nwith regard to the maximum age while granting<br \/>\napproval to the said course.  These contentions were<br \/>\nrejected by the learned Single Judge as well as by the<br \/>\nDivision Bench.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tIn these appeals the said contentions are not<br \/>\npressed.  The learned counsel for the appellants mainly<br \/>\nargued that the merit list should be arranged in such a<br \/>\nmanner so as to provide year wise list on the basis of<br \/>\nB.Ed.  training course  or the other training courses as<br \/>\nthe case may be for the purposes of selection to the<br \/>\nSpecial BTC Training Course, 2004. The learned counsel<br \/>\nmainly relied upon the provisions of the U.P. Basic<br \/>\nEducation (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 ( for short &#8216;the<br \/>\nRules&#8217;) in support of his submission. Rule 14 of the Rules<br \/>\nprovides for determination of vacancies and preparation<br \/>\nof list for appointment by direct recruitment to the post<br \/>\nof Mistress of Nursery Schools and Assistant Master or<br \/>\nAssistant Mistress of Junior Basic Schools.  Rule 14 was<br \/>\namended by Notification dated 28.6.1993.  Sub-rule (4)<br \/>\nof Rule 14  as it stood prior to its substitution provided<br \/>\nthat the names of the  candidates in the list prepared<br \/>\nunder sub-rule (2) shall be arranged in such manner<br \/>\nthat the candidates who have passed the required<br \/>\ntraining course earlier in point of time shall be placed<br \/>\nhigher than those who have passed the said training<br \/>\ncourse later, and the candidates who have passed the<br \/>\ntraining course shall be arranged in accordance with the<br \/>\nquality point marks specified in the appendix.  The High<br \/>\nCourt while dealing with the rules in response to the<br \/>\nsubmissions made by the appellants found that sub-<br \/>\nrules (3) to (6) were deleted by Notification dated<br \/>\n6.8.1997 and the amended rules do not provide for any<br \/>\nexemption and the selections were required to be based<br \/>\nonly upon the training qualification.  It is for that reason<br \/>\nthe High Court found that there is no question of<br \/>\narranging the list in such a manner that the candidates<br \/>\nwho have passed the required training course earlier in<br \/>\npoint of time shall be placed higher than that of those<br \/>\nwho have passed the said training course later.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tThe learned counsel for the appellants relying upon<br \/>\nthe statement made in the counter affidavit filed in<br \/>\nthese appeals wherein it is conceded that sub-rules (3)<br \/>\nto (6) of Rule 14  are not deleted submitted that the<br \/>\nmatter should be sent back for re-consideration of the<br \/>\nHigh Court by duly applying the effect of sub-rules (3) to<br \/>\n6 of Rule 14 of the Rules.  The submission was that the<br \/>\nmerit list is required to be prepared in accordance with<br \/>\nsub-rules (3) to (6) of Rule 14 of the Rules. The<br \/>\nsubmission in our considered opinion is totally<br \/>\nmisconceived.  We have already noticed that the U.P.<br \/>\nBasic Education (Teachers) Service Rules, 1981 deal<br \/>\nwith the post training scenario.  The Rules deal with the<br \/>\nselection and appointment of teachers from amongst the<br \/>\ncandidates already possessing the training qualifications.<br \/>\nThe Rules  do  not deal with the selection of the<br \/>\ncandidates into Basic Training Course.   The reliance<br \/>\nplaced upon the said Rules by the appellants in support<br \/>\nof their contention is totally untenable and<br \/>\nunsustainable. These Rules do not have any bearing in<br \/>\nthe matter of selection of candidates into Basic Training<br \/>\nCourse, 2004.  The policy decision of the Government<br \/>\ndated 14.1.2004  deals with the arrangement of the<br \/>\nSpecial BTC Training Course for the period of six months<br \/>\nfor those 46,189 B.Ed.\/L.T. qualified candidates.  The<br \/>\nprocess of selection of the candidates  for the said<br \/>\ntraining and the arrangement of the training is required<br \/>\nto be conducted in accordance with the guidelines,<br \/>\ndirections, conditions and restrictions incorporated<br \/>\nthereunder.  None of the appellants qualified themselves<br \/>\nfor undergoing the said training course inasmuch as they<br \/>\nwere not selected as they were not found meritorious or<br \/>\nover aged as the case may be.  It is not demonstrated<br \/>\nas to how the appellants were entitled for selection to<br \/>\nundergo Special BTC Training Course, 2004.  The<br \/>\nvalidity of the policy decision dated 14.1.2004 is not<br \/>\nimpugned in these appeals.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tNo other contention is urged.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tFor all the aforesaid reasons we find no merit in<br \/>\nthese appeals and they are accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tWe make no orders as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 Author: B Reddy Bench: Tarun Chatterjee, B. Sudershan Reddy CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2450 of 2007 PETITIONER: Devendra Singh &amp; Ors RESPONDENT: State of U.P. &amp; Ors DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11\/05\/2007 BENCH: Tarun Chatterjee &amp; B. Sudershan [&hellip;]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-02T15:03:36+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\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-02T15:03:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1511,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\",\"name\":\"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-02T15:03:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-02T15:03:36+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\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007","datePublished":"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-02T15:03:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007"},"wordCount":1511,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007","name":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-02T15:03:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/devendra-singh-ors-vs-state-of-u-p-ors-on-11-may-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Devendra Singh &amp; Ors vs State Of U.P. &amp; Ors on 11 May, 2007"}]},{"@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\/30791","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=30791"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30791\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}