{"id":31820,"date":"2008-08-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008"},"modified":"2019-03-07T12:28:48","modified_gmt":"2019-03-07T06:58:48","slug":"shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008<\/div>\n
                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                           Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00794 dated 16.6.2007\n                             Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant        -          Shri P.K. Pahuja\nRespondent           -      Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT)\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
     By application of 16.4.07 Shri P. K. Pahuja of Colaba, Mumbai, applied to
\nthe CPIO, DoPT seeking the following information:\n<\/p>\n
         “Kindly clarity whether following instance does\/ does not constitute
\n         anomaly for stepping up of pay with reference to Junior under Para
\n         2 (b) of Government of India Orders (27) below FR 22:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         A senior official who is neither on deputation nor has refused
\n         promotion; but draws less pay than that of junior official just
\n         because junior had been favoured with adhoc promotion of 4
\n         months or so prior to getting promotion by the senior one.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Illustration: Senior official got adhoc promotion to higher post from
\n         7.4.1997; Junior Official got adhoc promotion from 5.12.1996.
\n         Senior official’s promotion was regularized w.e.f. 19.8.07. Junior
\n         official’s promotion was regularized w.e.f. 20.9.1997. Pay scales of
\n         both the officials in the lower post and higher post were identical
\n         and regular promotion to higher post was in continuation of adhoc
\n         promotion.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     To this he received a reply from Ms. Urmila Rawat, Section Officer and
\nCPIO dated 29.4.07 as follows:\n<\/p>\n
         “Under the RTI Act 2005 the PIO is not obliged to furnish
\n         clarification. It is, however, stated that as per Para 2 (c) of this
\n         Dep’t. O. M. No. 4\/7\/92-Estt (pay-I) dated 4.1.93, if a senior joins
\n         the higher post later than the junior for whatsoever reasons
\n         whereby he draws less pay than the junior, in such cases the senior
\n         cannot claim stepping up of pay at par with the junior.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Not satisfied Shri Pahuja moved his first appeal before the Appellate
\nAuthority, DoPT stating that the information supplied was not that he had asked,
\nas what he had sought was that whether the instance described by him<\/p>\n
                                               1<\/span>
\n “constitute an anomaly under Para 2 (b) of Government of India Orders (27)
\nbelow FR 22. CPIO has, however, furnished the information with respect to
\nconstitution of anomaly under Para 2 (c) which is irrelevant in the case.”\n<\/p>\n
     Upon this Ms. Rita Mathur, Director (Pay) and Appellate Authority again
\nexamined the appeal and ordered as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “The CPIO has informed the rule position contained in Para 2 (c) of
\n       OM No. 4\/7\/92 Estt. Pay I dated 4th November 1993 that if a senior
\n       joins the higher post later that the junior, for whatever reasons,
\n       whereby he draws less pay than the junior in such cases, senior
\n       cannot claim stepping up of pay.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       As regards your specific query whether in the case illustrated by
\n       you the less pay drawn by the senior would constitute an anomaly
\n       under Para 2 (b), the position is clarified in Para 2 (b) itself. It has
\n       clearly been stated that “the increased pay drawn by a junior either
\n       due to adhoc officiating\/ regular service rendered in higher posts for
\n       periods earlier than the senior, cannot, therefore, be an anomaly in
\n       strict sense of the term.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Even if the senior is on deputation nor has refused promotion, if the
\n       junior was given adhoc promotion prior to the senior due to which
\n       he was drawing more pay than the senior it will not constitute an
\n       anomaly in terms of Para 2 (b) of OM dated 4th November 1993.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Appellant has then moved his second appeal before us with the following prayer:\n<\/p>\n
       “(1) It is requested kindly to issue appropriate directions to
\n       DOPT-supreme body responsible for framing of norms\/
\n       guidelines for smooth, effective and efficient functioning of the
\n       administration to cover the unique case of anomaly reported
\n       by appellant as the same has not been contemplated\/
\n       visualized while issuing the guidelines with respect to
\n       anomaly in pay fixation.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       (2) DOPT may also be directed to develop a system whereby
\n       officials at helm of affairs are held accountable and penalized
\n       in proportion to the pay drawn by them at the time of indulging
\n       malpractices that results in creation of artificial\/ deliberate
\n       anomaly in the pay of senior official that results not only
\n       humiliation but also cause pecuniary loss for no fault of him
\n       and onus to prove that the particular official did not indulge in
\n       malpractice shall lay with him.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                          2<\/span><\/p>\n
      The appeal was heard by Videoconference on 29.8.08. The following are
\npresent:\n<\/p>\n
              Appellant at NIC Studio, Mumbai.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Shri P. K. Pahuja.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Shri Harish Chander, assisting Shri P. K. Pahuja.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Respondents at CIC, New Delhi.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Mrs. Rita Mathur, Director.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Mrs. Urmila Rawat, Section Officer.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              Shri Yogesh Mehta, Law Officer, NCW.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Shri Harish Chander submitted that the interpretation given by Dy. Secy.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Ms. Rawat is incorrect and he had, therefore, made the plea before us expecting
\nthat we will set right the injustice. Ms. Rita Mathur on the other hand submitted
\nthat there was no misinterpretation. The rules themselves are quite clear on the
\nquestion regarding which she has commented.\n<\/p>\n
                               DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
     What appellant has sought from CPIO is in fact an opinion, which he is
\nentitled to seek in terms of “information” as defined in sec. 2(f). However, we
\nhave repeatedly held that in light of sec. 2(f) opening with the information being
\ndefined as being “material in any form”, simply an opinion held personally, and
\ntherefore not in material form, does not constitute “opinion” defined as
\ninformation under the Right to Information Act. The DoPT, therefore, deserves to
\nbe commended for having responded to the application and provided the
\nclarification sought by Shri Pahuja. If, therefore, on receiving this clarification,
\nappellant Sh. Pahuja has come to the conclusion that the rules are unjust, this
\nCommission is not the proper authority for him to approach to seek redress,
\nsince our jurisdiction is limited to see that the information is provided, which in
\nthis case it had been, or to recommend changes in rules \/ procedures unless we
\nconsider that they require be brought into conformity with the RTI Act, in which
\ncase alone can we issue direction u\/s 19 (8) sub-section (a), or recommend as
\nmuch u\/s 25(5).\n<\/p>\n
                                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
       This appeal being beyond our jurisdiction, therefore, is hereby dismissed.
\nHowever, appellant is advised that if aggrieved, on the basis of the information
\nthat he has been provided, he may make a representation to the appropriate
\nauthority which may either be Secretary DOPT or the Cabinet Secretary
\npresenting his objections to the rules and the interpretation given thereto in the
\nDoPT.\n<\/p>\n
      Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n29.8.2008<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO
\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
(Pankaj Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n29.8.2008<\/p>\n
                                        4<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2007\/00794 dated 16.6.2007 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant – Shri P.K. Pahuja Respondent – Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) Facts : By application of 16.4.07 Shri P. K. Pahuja of […]<\/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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-07T06:58:48+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\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-07T06:58:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1083,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-07T06:58:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-07T06:58:48+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\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-07T06:58:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008"},"wordCount":1083,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008","name":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & ... on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-07T06:58:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-p-k-pahuja-vs-department-of-personnel-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri P.K. Pahuja vs Department Of Personnel & … on 29 August, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31820","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=31820"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31820\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}