{"id":3531,"date":"2010-04-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010"},"modified":"2018-08-11T15:11:37","modified_gmt":"2018-08-11T09:41:37","slug":"k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 9932 of 2010(N)\n\n\n1. K.ABOOBACKER,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE SECRETARY,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. P.AMEER, S\/O.KOMU HAJI,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN\n\n Dated :05\/04\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                      K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J\n                       ...........................................\n                     WP(C).NO.9932                   OF 2010\n                       ............................................\n          DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2010\n\n                                  JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner is a Stage Carriage operator conducting services<\/p>\n
on the route Vettikad-Perinthalmanna on the strength of a regular<\/p>\n
permit granted to his Stage Carriage bearing registration No.KL-10\/N<\/p>\n
7711.    He has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P4 order of the<\/p>\n
STAT, allowing a revision petition filed by the second respondent<\/p>\n
herein under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The second<\/p>\n
respondent had challenged Ext.P3, which is the approved timings<\/p>\n
issued for the conduct of his services, before the State Transport<\/p>\n
Appellate Tribunal(STAT). Ext.P3 order shows that the same was<\/p>\n
rendered after hearing all the affected parties. However, before the<\/p>\n
STAT, all affected persons were not made parties. Only some of the<\/p>\n
parties, who came to          know of the proceedings got themselves<\/p>\n
impleaded. As per Ext.P4 order, Ext.P3 timings were set aside and the<\/p>\n
matter was remanded for fresh settlement of the timings, after hearing<\/p>\n
all interested parties. Accordingly, Ext.P6 timings have been issued.<\/p>\n
Wpc 9932\/2010                        2<\/span><\/p>\n
The petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 objections to Ext.P6. It is the<\/p>\n
contention of the petitioner that since Ext.P6 is only a consequential<\/p>\n
order issued pursuant to Ext.P4 judgment of the STAT, it is a futile<\/p>\n
exercise challenging the same before the said Tribunal.<\/p>\n
      2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the mandate of the<\/p>\n
Division Bench which is contained in Ext.P5 judgment to the effect<\/p>\n
that all affected persons should be made parties before the STAT has<\/p>\n
been flouted in passing Ext.P4. Consequently, the petitioner, who is<\/p>\n
an interested person was not heard before Ext.P4 was passed, causing<\/p>\n
irreparable injury and injustice to the petitioner. As a consequence, the<\/p>\n
petitioner is in a situation where it is not possible for him to challenge<\/p>\n
Ext.P6 effectively. Therefore, he prays for setting aside Ext.P4 and P6.<\/p>\n
      3. The learned Senior Government Pleader, Mr.K.C.Santhosh<\/p>\n
Kumar, points out that though the petitioner was not a party to Ext.P4,<\/p>\n
when a timing conference was held pursuant to the said order on<\/p>\n
25.1.2010, the petitioner also participated and his objections were<\/p>\n
specifically considered. In view of the above, it is submitted that the<\/p>\n
grievances of the petitioner do not survive. It is long after the issue of<\/p>\n
Wpc 9932\/2010                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
Ext.P6 that Ext.P7 objections have been filed on 7.3.2010. Therefore,<\/p>\n
he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
      4. I notice from Ext.P3 that the same was issued on the basis of a<\/p>\n
timing conference conducted on 17.2.2009 in which the second<\/p>\n
respondent as well as other 64 operators including the KSRTC had<\/p>\n
attended. Therefore, Ext.P3 shows that the timings therein were issued<\/p>\n
after hearing all the interested persons. However, Ext.P4 shows that the<\/p>\n
revision petition was initially filed with only the RTA and the Secretary<\/p>\n
thereof as parties and that respondents 3 to 11 were subsequently<\/p>\n
impleaded. Though 64 enroute operators were heard before passing<\/p>\n
Ext.P3, only nine operators were parties to Ext.P4. It is the above<\/p>\n
practice of passing orders without all the interested persons on the<\/p>\n
party array that has been deprecated by the Division Bench in Ext.P5<\/p>\n
judgment. In the said judgment dated 18.12.2009 in W.A.2877 of<\/p>\n
2009, after considering the contentions of the parties, the Division<\/p>\n
Bench has made the following observations.\n<\/p>\n
            ” We notice that in Ext.P4, there is a finding in<\/p>\n
            favour of the appellant, that his claim is genuine<\/p>\n
            and thereafter the remand is made. So, the<\/p>\n
Wpc 9932\/2010                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
            Secretary, R.T.A is bound by that finding. Even<\/p>\n
            if other operators on the route are heard, the<\/p>\n
            Secretary, R.T.A is bound to redress the<\/p>\n
            grievance of the appellant, which has been found<\/p>\n
            to be genuine by the Tribunal. Therefore, before<\/p>\n
            making such an observation on merits, the<\/p>\n
            Tribunal should have given an opportunity of<\/p>\n
            being heard to the affected operators. It should<\/p>\n
            have insisted that all those, who are operating on<\/p>\n
            the route and who participated in the timing<\/p>\n
            conference, based on which Ext.P2 was issued<\/p>\n
            should have been impleaded. Otherwise, the<\/p>\n
            revision petition should have been dismissed.<\/p>\n
            The illegal practice followed by the Tribunal<\/p>\n
            cannot be pressed into service as a ground to<\/p>\n
            defend Ext.P4″.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The Division Bench has gone on to conclude the issue in the following<\/p>\n
words:-\n<\/p>\n
            “Finally, it is pointed out by the learned counsel<\/p>\n
            for the appellant that the writ petitioner can<\/p>\n
            challenge Ext.P5 by filing revision petition<\/p>\n
            before the Tribunal. But, we notice that as long<\/p>\n
            as the observation of the Tribunal in Ext.P4<\/p>\n
Wpc 9932\/2010                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
            regarding the merits of the case of the appellant<\/p>\n
            remains, the said challenge will not be<\/p>\n
            efficacious”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5. In view of the above authoritative pronouncement, there could<\/p>\n
be no doubt that the remand made in Ext.P4 by the STAT, without all<\/p>\n
the affected parties on the party array, was uncalled for. The said order<\/p>\n
has become final and a consequential order Ext.P6 has also been<\/p>\n
passed pursuant to the same. The petitioner participated in the timing<\/p>\n
conference in which Ext.P6 was settled. His objections have also been<\/p>\n
considered. In view of the fact that Ext.P7 has already been issued, the<\/p>\n
proper remedy for the petitioner is to challenge Ext.P7 before the<\/p>\n
STAT. It is for the petitioner to point out the circumstances under<\/p>\n
which Ext.P4 was passed without the petitioner on the party array. I do<\/p>\n
not find any reason to presume that the contentions of the petitioner<\/p>\n
would not be considered by the authority in the proper perspective. I<\/p>\n
also notice that the STAT had directed in Ext.P4 to settle the timings<\/p>\n
afresh ” after giving an opportunity to all concerned of being heard”.<\/p>\n
However, as observed by the Division Bench in the passages quoted<\/p>\n
Wpc 9932\/2010                      6<\/span><\/p>\n
above, an opportunity of being heard at the time of settlement of<\/p>\n
timings cannot cure the defect of not being made a party before the<\/p>\n
STAT.\n<\/p>\n
      6. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of<\/p>\n
directing the petitioner to challenge Ext.P6 before the STAT. In the<\/p>\n
event of the petitioner challenging the same before the said authority,<\/p>\n
the STAT shall consider the same in accordance with law, and shall<\/p>\n
pass appropriate orders thereon, untrammelled by any of the<\/p>\n
observations made by it in its order dated 6.4.2009 in MVARP No.90<\/p>\n
of 2009 evidenced herein by Ext.P4. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                   K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
lgk<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 9932 of 2010(N) 1. K.ABOOBACKER, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE SECRETARY, … Respondent 2. P.AMEER, S\/O.KOMU HAJI, For Petitioner :SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN Dated :05\/04\/2010 O […]<\/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-3531","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - 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\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-11T09:41:37+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-11T09:41:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1074,\"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\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\",\"name\":\"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-11T09:41:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - 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\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-11T09:41:37+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-11T09:41:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010"},"wordCount":1074,"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\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010","name":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-11T09:41:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-aboobacker-vs-the-secretary-on-5-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.Aboobacker vs The Secretary on 5 April, 2010"}]},{"@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\/3531","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=3531"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3531\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3531"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3531"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3531"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}