{"id":33573,"date":"2008-01-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-01-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008"},"modified":"2016-09-25T22:35:11","modified_gmt":"2016-09-25T17:05:11","slug":"deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","title":{"rendered":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Chattisgarh High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR         \n\n     WPS No 4740 of 2007 \n\n     Deo Narayan Pathak\n\n                        ...Petitioner\n\n                           VERSUS\n\n     1 State of Chhattisgarh\n\n     2 Managing Director Chhattisgarh\n\n       Krishi Vipanan Board Bhawan\n\n       Ravigram Raipur\n\n     3 Shree Shantanu Panda Mandi \n\n       Inspector In charge Secretary\n\n       Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti\n\n       Amandulla District Janjgir Champa\n\n                        ...Respondents<\/pre>\n<pre>!    Shri Ashish Shrivastava Advocate\n\n     for the petitioner\n\n^    1 Shri Satish Gupta Government\n\n       Advocate for the State\n\n     2 Shri R S Marhas Advocate for\n\n       the respondent No 2\n\n     3 Shri B D Guru Advocate for\n\n       the respondent No 3\n\n     Honble Shri Satish K Agnihotri J\n\n     Dated: 28\/01\/2008\n\n:    Oral Order\n\n\n\n     WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF     \n\n            THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \n\n\n                    ORAL ORDER\n\n           (Passed on 28th day of  January, 2008)\n\n       I.A. No. 4.\n<\/pre>\n<p>       This  is  an  application  for  taking  document   on<br \/>\n       record. The application is ordered as prayed for.\n<\/p>\n<p>  1.   The petitioner, working as Senior Secretary in Krishi<br \/>\n       Upaj Mandi Samiti, Raigarh, by order dated 30th July, 2007<br \/>\n       (Annexure P\/1), was transferred to Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti,<br \/>\n       Amandulla, District Janjgir Champa, on administrative<br \/>\n       grounds. In his place, the respondent No. 3 was transferred<br \/>\n       from Amandulla, by the same order.\n<\/p>\n<p>  2.   Learned counsel contends that, being aggrieved by the<br \/>\n       order dated 30.07.2007, the petitioner approached this Court<br \/>\n       challenging the validity of the impugned order mainly on two<br \/>\n       grounds. Firstly, the petitioner has suffered on account of<br \/>\n       several transfers made frequently, secondly, it is malafide<br \/>\n       exercise of power as the impugned transfer order was passed<br \/>\n       in order to accommodate respondent No. 3.\n<\/p>\n<p>  3.   First contention of the petitioner derives support from<br \/>\n       the facts that the petitioner was posted at Krishi Upaj<br \/>\n       Mandi Samiti, Bhatapara from where he was transferred to<br \/>\n       Jagdalpur. He joined at Jagdalpur on 09.06.2002. After<br \/>\n       serving one year at Jagdalpur Mandi Samiti, the petitioner<br \/>\n       was transferred to Raigarh vide order dated 25.06.2007.<br \/>\n       Again, vide order dated in 30th July, 2007 (Annexure P\/1),<br \/>\n       the petitioner was transferred to Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti,<br \/>\n       Amandulla, District Janjgir Champa, on administrative<br \/>\n       grounds.\n<\/p>\n<p>  4.   On   second  contention,  learned  counsel  for   the<br \/>\n       petitioner would submit that there is no reason to transfer<br \/>\n       the petitioner. It appears from perusal of the transfer<br \/>\n       order itself that it was passed to accommodate respondent<br \/>\n       No. 3. Thus, this is a malafide exercise of power influenced<br \/>\n       by extraneous considerations.\n<\/p>\n<p>  5.   Shri  R.S.Marhas, learned counsel appearing  for  the<br \/>\n       respondent No. 2, per contra, would submit that there is no<br \/>\n       question of malafide exercise of power as malafide is to be<br \/>\n       alleged  against a particular person. Mere  self-same<br \/>\n       statement  that  the order was passed to  accommodate<br \/>\n       respondent No. 3, cannot be the basis for proving malafide<br \/>\n       against  the respondent No. 2. In respect of frequent<br \/>\n       transfer, learned counsel would submit that it is a routine<br \/>\n       transfer in public interest on account of administrative<br \/>\n       exigency. This impugned transfer is the third transfer from<br \/>\n       the year 2005. It cannot be held as frequent transfer as the<br \/>\n       same was passed due to administrative exigency.\n<\/p>\n<p>  6.   Shri B.D.Guru, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3<br \/>\n       would submit that the respondent no. 3 has not tried to get<br \/>\n       the petitioner transferred and he is ready and willing to<br \/>\n       work at any place wherever the respondent No. 2 posts him in<br \/>\n       public interest and administrative exigency.\n<\/p>\n<p>  7.   Shri Satish Gupta, learned Government Advocate, would<br \/>\n       submit that the State is a formal party. The respondent No.<br \/>\n       2 is the employer and it is for the respondent No. 2 to<br \/>\n       decide  the  suitability of posting of  employees  on<br \/>\n       administrative exigency and public interest.\n<\/p>\n<p>  8.   After having heard learned counsel for the parties and<br \/>\n       perusal of the pleadings and records appended thereto, it<br \/>\n       appears that after filing of this petition, the impugned<br \/>\n       transfer order was stayed on 14.08.2007 by this Court. On<br \/>\n       the strength of the interim order dated 14.08.2007, the<br \/>\n       petitioner has continued on the same place.\n<\/p>\n<p>  9.   In the meantime, during the pendency of this petition,<br \/>\n       the respondent No. 2 has also passed the order the order<br \/>\n       dated 20.08.2007 cancelling the impugned order dated 30th<br \/>\n       July, 2007. However, in the order it is stated that the<br \/>\n       order was cancelled till the pendency of the writ petition.<br \/>\n       It is well settled that an order can be suspended during<br \/>\n       pendency of any petition, but it cannot be cancelled for a<br \/>\n       limited period.\n<\/p>\n<p>  10.  Since the order itself has been cancelled, there is no<br \/>\n       question to revive the order. The respondent No. 2, being<br \/>\n       the employer is at liberty to place the petitioner as well<br \/>\n       as respondent No. 3 at a place where their services are<br \/>\n       required without any hindrance, in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.  Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view<br \/>\nof the fact that the order has been cancelled, the<br \/>\nrespondent No. 2 may not insist upon compliance of the order<br \/>\ndated 30.07.2007. Shri Marhas, learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent No. 2 has no quarrel with this submission.\n<\/p>\n<p>  12.  In  view  of  the foregoing, it is not  necessary  to<br \/>\n       examine the case on merit as the learned counsel appearing<br \/>\n       for the petitioner does not press other grounds raised<br \/>\n       above.\n<\/p>\n<p>  13.  Accordingly,  this petition is disposed  of,  without<br \/>\n       insisting upon compliance of the order dated 30.07.2007<br \/>\n       (Annexure P\/1), which is impugned herein, the respondent No.<br \/>\n       2 is at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with<br \/>\n       law, keeping in view the public interest and administrative<br \/>\n       exigency. No order asto costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Chattisgarh High Court Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No 4740 of 2007 Deo Narayan Pathak &#8230;Petitioner VERSUS 1 State of Chhattisgarh 2 Managing Director Chhattisgarh Krishi Vipanan Board Bhawan Ravigram Raipur 3 Shree Shantanu Panda Mandi Inspector In charge [&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":[12,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33573","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chattisgarh-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - 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\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-25T17:05:11+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-25T17:05:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\"},\"wordCount\":752,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Chattisgarh High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\",\"name\":\"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-25T17:05:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 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":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - 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\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-25T17:05:11+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 2008","datePublished":"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-25T17:05:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008"},"wordCount":752,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Chattisgarh High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008","name":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir ... on 28 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-01-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-25T17:05:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/deo-narayan-pathak-vs-amandulla-district-janjgir-on-28-january-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Deo Narayan Pathak vs Amandulla District Janjgir &#8230; on 28 January, 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\/33573","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=33573"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33573\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33573"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33573"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33573"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}