{"id":36360,"date":"2009-10-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009"},"modified":"2015-01-17T15:42:36","modified_gmt":"2015-01-17T10:12:36","slug":"lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur<\/div>\n
Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009<\/div>\n
                                                                        1\n                                                         SBCW NO. 5483\/08\n\n\n    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT\n                        JODHPUR\n\n                               O R D E R\n\n                            Lehru Lal Jat\n                                 Vs.\n                     State of Rajasthan & Others\n\n               S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 5483\/2008\n                                  .........\n                Date of Order        :        15.10.2009\n                              PRESENT\n               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR\n\n\nMr. Sandeep Shah for the petitioner.\nMr. Rajesh Bhati for Mr. R.L.Jangid, AAG for the respondents.\n\n\nBY THE COURT<\/pre>\n
               By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the<\/p>\n
Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to the<\/p>\n
respondents to consider his case for appointment on the post of<\/p>\n
Prabodhak in pursuance of the advertisement dated 31.5.2008<\/p>\n
issued by the respondents and declare that the petitioner was<\/p>\n
within   age    limit   for   consideration   of   his   candidature   for<\/p>\n
appointment on the post of Prabodhak in pursuance of the<\/p>\n
advertisement dated 31.5.2008.\n<\/p>\n
               I have heard learned counsel for the parties.<\/p>\n
               It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
that the petitioner was initially engaged on the post of Instructor<\/p>\n
under the Panchayati Samiti, Chittorgarh by order dated 20.5.91<\/p>\n
and he discharged the duties on the post of Instructor till<\/p>\n
31.3.2001. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the<\/p>\n
petitioner has been discharging the duties of para-teacher since<\/p>\n
01.7.99. The petitioner applied for the post of Prabodhak under
\n                                                                   2<\/span>
\n                                                   SBCW NO. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 (for<\/p>\n
short ‘the Rules of 2008’ hereinafter). According to learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was possessing five<\/p>\n
years continuous teaching experience without any break in the<\/p>\n
recognized educational institution\/ educational project, however,<\/p>\n
he has been denied consideration on the ground that on the<\/p>\n
relevant date i.e. last date for submission of application, the<\/p>\n
petitioner has already crossed the age as provided under Rule 13<\/p>\n
of the Rules of 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner has<\/p>\n
relied on a decision of this Court in Amar Singh Vs. State of<\/p>\n
Rajasthan and Ors., S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 6118\/08 decided<\/p>\n
on 20.2.2009. In that case, the date of birth of the petitioner<\/p>\n
therein was 13.2.1966 i.e. on the date of joining as Shiksha<\/p>\n
Sahyogi on 03.7.2002, his age was 35 years 07 months. The<\/p>\n
Proviso to Rule 13 of the Rules of 2008 provides that upper age<\/p>\n
limit mentioned in Rule 13 shall be relaxed by five years in case<\/p>\n
of male candidates belonging to SC\/ST\/OBC. Proviso (v) to Rule<\/p>\n
13   further   provides   that   the   person   serving   under   the<\/p>\n
educational project in the State viz. Rajiv Gandhi Pathshala\/<\/p>\n
Shiksha Karmi Board\/ Lok Jumbish Pariyojana\/ Sarva Shiksha<\/p>\n
Abhiyan\/ District Primary Education Programme shall be deemed<\/p>\n
to be within age limit, had they been within the age limit when<\/p>\n
they were initially engaged even though they may have crossed<\/p>\n
the age limit at the time of direct recruitment. In that case, the<\/p>\n
petitioner therein was member of Other Backward Class and<\/p>\n
therefore, entitled for five years relaxation and as such on the<\/p>\n
last date of filing of application, his age could have been<\/p>\n
35+5=40 years and he was less than 40 years of age.
\n                                                                 3<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
                                                 SBCW NO. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
Considering the provisions of Rule 13 (v) and the proviso thereto<\/p>\n
providing the relaxation of age, the petitioner therein was held to<\/p>\n
be within age limit. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended<\/p>\n
that programme of non-formal\/informal education was also<\/p>\n
conducted by the State Govt. and the educational institution\/<\/p>\n
project enumerated in Section 13 is not exhaustive.<\/p>\n
           Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the<\/p>\n
petitioner was neither engaged in Rajeev Gandhi Swarn Jayanti<\/p>\n
Pathshala\/ Siksha Karmi Board\/ Lok Jumbish Pariyojna\/ sarva<\/p>\n
Siksha Abhiyan\/ District Primary Education Programme nor the<\/p>\n
educational institution run by State Govt. On the contrary, the<\/p>\n
petitioner was engaged in non-formal\/informal education and he<\/p>\n
was not on full time appointment and according to learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the respondent, the scheme of non-formal\/ informal<\/p>\n
education is to motivate and teach such students wherever they<\/p>\n
are found even either at Panchayat or at any other places in<\/p>\n
villages and motivate them for education particularly children<\/p>\n
between 6 to 14 years of age and therefore, the case of the<\/p>\n
petitioner does not fall in the categories provided under Rule 13<\/p>\n
of the Rules of 2008. Learned counsel for the respondent has<\/p>\n
also relied on a decision of this Court in Sumer Singh Rathore Vs.<\/p>\n
State of Rajasthan and Ors. S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 3899\/08<\/p>\n
decided on 08.08.08 wherein the petitioner therein was at the<\/p>\n
ripe age of 48 years and sought relaxation in maximum age limit<\/p>\n
for the purpose of consideration for appointment to the post of<\/p>\n
Prabodhak under Rule 13 (v) of the Rules of 2008. This Court<\/p>\n
held that the petitioner is in the ripe age of 48 years and<\/p>\n
therefore, now grant of age relaxation while making appointment
\n                                                                  4<\/span>
\n                                                  SBCW NO. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
to the post of Prabodhak shall not at all be in public interest and<\/p>\n
dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner therein.    Learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the respondents has also relied on a decision of<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of West Bengal and another Vs.<\/p>\n
Monirujjaman Mullick and others, AIR 1996 SC 3466, wherein<\/p>\n
the doctrine of equal pay for equal work came to be examined by<\/p>\n
the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In that case, the State Government<\/p>\n
implemented a scheme for imparting non-formal education to<\/p>\n
the children in the age group of 9\/11 years who were either<\/p>\n
school drop-outs or did not go to school. The scheme provided<\/p>\n
for the opening of non-formal education centres (Part time) by<\/p>\n
the State Government with the help of Central Government<\/p>\n
grant. The non-formal centres were part-time institutions. The<\/p>\n
instructors were given a fixed honorarium of Rs.105\/- per month<\/p>\n
at the primary level and Rs. 125\/- per month at the upper<\/p>\n
primary level. Persons with a motivation to serve the community<\/p>\n
particularly weaker sections were appointed instructors. They<\/p>\n
were required to teach the children for two hours a day. The<\/p>\n
centres were run by the Panchayat Samities in rural areas and<\/p>\n
by the Municipal Committees\/ Corporations in urban areas. There<\/p>\n
were no specific buildings or sites for the centres. The instructors<\/p>\n
could use any site or building belonging to a social organisation<\/p>\n
or a local authority. On these premises, the Hon’ble Apex Court<\/p>\n
held as under:-\n<\/p>\n
     “The non-formal educational centres cannot be
\n     equated with the primary schools which are regularly
\n     run by the Educational Department of the State
\n     Government. Apart from the basic qualitative
\n     differences between the two institutions even the
\n     nature of work of the non-formal instructors and the
\n     primary school teachers is not identical. The method
\n                                                                       5<\/span>
\n                                                       SBCW NO. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
          of appointment, the source of recruitment, method of
\n          teaching, hours of teaching and the mode of payment
\n          are entirely different. Thus, the instructors appointed
\n          under the scheme could not claim same scales of pay
\n          and allowances as are admissible and paid to regular
\n          primary school teachers of Education Department of
\n          the State Government. The doctrine of equal pay for
\n          equal work could not be invoked.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                 In the instant case, indisputably the petitioner was<\/p>\n
     initially engaged for imparting non-formal\/informal education and<\/p>\n
     this fact has not been disputed. Even it is the case of the<\/p>\n
     petitioner himself that he was initially engaged for non-<\/p>\n
     formal\/informal education scheme as instructor. On the date of<\/p>\n
     filing of the writ petition on 6.8.08, the petitioner has already<\/p>\n
     attained the age of 50 years as mentioned in the writ petition.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                 Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and<\/p>\n
     having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my<\/p>\n
     view, the case of the petitioner does not fall in the age relaxation<\/p>\n
     as provided in Rule 13 of the Rules of 2008. As the petitioner<\/p>\n
     was neither engaged by the State Govt. in Rajeev Gandhi Swarn<\/p>\n
     Jayanti Pathshala\/ Siksha Karmi Board\/ Lok Jumbish Pariyojna\/<\/p>\n
     sarva Siksha Abhiyan\/ District Primary Education Programme and<\/p>\n
     therefore, the relaxation provided under Rule 13 (v) of the Rules<\/p>\n
     of 2008 and proviso thereto has no application to the case of the<\/p>\n
     petitioner. In this view of the matter, the decision relied on by<\/p>\n
     learned counsel for the petitioner is of no help to the petitioner.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                 In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find no merit in<\/p>\n
     the writ petition. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. No<\/p>\n
     order as to costs.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                                       (H.R.PANWAR), J.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
rp
\n                                                                    6<\/span>
\n                                                    SBCW NO. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
     S.B.Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 9841\/08
\n                In
\n     S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 5483\/08<\/p>\n
     Date of Order    :     15\/10\/2009<\/p>\n
                HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR.\n<\/p>\n
\n     Mr. Sandeep Shah for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
     Mr. Rajesh Bhati for Mr. R.L.Jangid, AAG for the respondents.<\/p>\n
                Since the writ petition itself has been dismissed, the<\/p>\n
     stay petition also stands dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
                                                    (H.R.PANWAR), J.\n<\/p>\n
rp\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 1 SBCW NO. 5483\/08 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Lehru Lal Jat Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 5483\/2008 ……… Date of Order : 15.10.2009 […]<\/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":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"\nLehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-17T10:12:36+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-17T10:12:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1365,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-17T10:12:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-17T10:12:36+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-17T10:12:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009"},"wordCount":1365,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009","name":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-17T10:12:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lehru-lal-jat-vs-state-ors-on-15-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Lehru Lal Jat vs State & Ors on 15 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36360","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=36360"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36360\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}