{"id":3754,"date":"2010-08-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010"},"modified":"2015-03-04T16:39:57","modified_gmt":"2015-03-04T11:09:57","slug":"smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                     W.P.NO.3495\/2009 (S)\n\n27.8.2010\n\n    Shri Sanjay K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.\n\n    Shri B.N. Mishra, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent<\/pre>\n<p>State.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Grievance put-forth by the petitioner in the present petition<br \/>\nis against non-grant of family pension in lieu of death of her<br \/>\nhusband employed as Jeep Driver on regular contingency<br \/>\nestablishment in the department of Horticulture who expired on<br \/>\n29.10.1986.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Husband of the petitioner was initially appointed in the<br \/>\nHorticulture   Department     on   23.12.1978     on   daily-wages.<br \/>\nThereafter, w.e.f. 1.4.1980 he was brought in the regular work-<br \/>\ncharged establishment as Jeep Driver.       While discharging his<br \/>\nduties as Jeep Driver on regular work-charged establishment,<br \/>\nhusband of the petitioner died while in service on 29.10.1986.<br \/>\nAfter his death, petitioner approached the authorities for<br \/>\nsettlement of retrial dues including family pension. The request<br \/>\nof the petitioner for grant of family pension was turned down by<br \/>\nthe respondents by letter dated 25.6.1997; whereby, petitioner<br \/>\nwas informed that since her husband has not rendered 10 years<br \/>\nof service in the regular work-charged establishment and has<br \/>\nthus not qualified for pension under Madhya Pradesh (Work<br \/>\nCharged &amp; Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979;<br \/>\ntherefore, she is not entitled for family pension.     Aggrieved of<br \/>\nthe denial of family pension the petitioner has filed this petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>    It is contended that the respondents have misconstrued the<br \/>\nprovisions of Rules of 1979 in denying the family pension which<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>she is entitled for as per provisions contained under Rule 4 A.<br \/>\nIt is further contended that for grant of family pension the<br \/>\nrequirement of minimum 10 years of service in regular work-<br \/>\ncharged establishment is not necessary and if a person engaged<br \/>\non a regular work-charged establishment even for a day his<br \/>\ndependent would be entitled for family pension in case of his<br \/>\ndeath while in service.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Respondents on their turn embedded to the stand that<br \/>\npetitioner is not entitled for family pension because her<br \/>\nhusband did not render qualifying service of 10 years as per<br \/>\nRule 6 of the Rules of 1979. It is urged that since the petitioner<br \/>\nhas no right for family pension the petition deserves to be<br \/>\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Rule 4 A of the Rules of 1979 and Rule 6 thereof<br \/>\nrespectively provide for:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>    &#8220;4 A. Not withstanding anything contained in rule 4<br \/>\n    the family of a permanent employee, who dies while in<br \/>\n    service or after retirement on pension on or after the<br \/>\n    1st April 1981 shall be entitled to family pension at the<br \/>\n    rate of 30% of his\/her pay drawn at the time of<br \/>\n    death\/retirement subject to minimum, of Rs.40\/- per<br \/>\n    month and maximum of Rs.100\/- per month subject<br \/>\n    to other conditions of Rule 47 of Madhya Pradesh Civil<br \/>\n    Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 except sub-rule (3) of<br \/>\n    the said Rules.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>    6.       Commencement of qualifying service.- (1)<br \/>\n    Subject to the provisions of Chapter III of the Madhya<br \/>\n    Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 or section<br \/>\n    IV of the Madhya Pradesh New Pension Rules, 1951 as<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>    the case may be, for calculating qualifying service of a<br \/>\n    permanent employee who retires as such, the service<br \/>\n    rendered with effect from the 1st January, 1959<br \/>\n    onwards shall be counted.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>    (2)    On absorption of a permanent employee without<br \/>\n    interruption against any regular pensionable post, the<br \/>\n    service rendered with effect from 1st January, 1959<br \/>\n    onward shall be counted for pension as if such service<br \/>\n    was rendered in a regular post.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>    (3)    On absorption of temporary employee without<br \/>\n    interruption against any regular pensionable post, the<br \/>\n    service rendered with effect from 1st January, 1974<br \/>\n    onwards, if such service is of less than six years shall<br \/>\n    be counted for pension as if such service was rendered<br \/>\n    in a regular post.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>    When the aforesaid two Rules are read together, it is clear<br \/>\nas crystal that the provisions which govern the family pension<br \/>\nhas a different field of operation than the provisions regarding<br \/>\npension to an employee who retires from the work-charged<br \/>\nestablishment and are governed by Rule 6 of Rules of 1979.\n<\/p>\n<p>    By virtue of Rule 4 A the provisions as contained under<br \/>\nRule 47 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 are<br \/>\nattracted. The said Rule provides for<\/p>\n<p>    47.    Contributory     Family      Pension.   &#8211;   (1)   The<br \/>\n    provisions of this rule shall apply:-\n<\/p>\n<p>    (a)   to a Government servant entering service in a<br \/>\n          pensionable establishment or on after 1st April<br \/>\n          1966, and<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>(b)   to a Government servant who was in service on 31st<br \/>\n      March, 1966 and came to be governed by the<br \/>\n      provisions of the Family Pension Scheme for State<br \/>\n      Government          Employees,      1966    contained       in<br \/>\n      Government           of    Madhya     Pradesh       Finance<br \/>\n      Department memo No. 1963\/C.R903-IV-R. II dated<br \/>\n      17th August, 1966 as in force immediately before<br \/>\n      the commencement of these rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2)    Subject to the provision of sub-rule (5) and<br \/>\nwithout prejudice to the provisions contained in sub-<br \/>\nrule (3), where a Government servant dies-\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)   during the period of service he was found medically<br \/>\n      fit at the time of appointment,<\/p>\n<p>(b)   after retirement from service and was on the date of<br \/>\n      death in receipt of a pension or compassionate<br \/>\n      allowance, referred to in Chapter V other than the<br \/>\n      pension referred to in Rule 34, on the date of death,<br \/>\n      the family of the deceased shall be entitled to a<br \/>\n      contributory family pension (hereinafter in this rule<br \/>\n      referred to as Family pension) the amount of which<br \/>\n      shall be determined as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>              Pay of Government Servant    Amount of monthly Family Pension<\/p>\n<p>      (i)     Below Rs.400                30 per cent. Of pay subject to<br \/>\n                                          minimum of Rs.60 and a<br \/>\n                                          maximum of Rs.100.\n<\/p>\n<p>      (ii)    Rs.400 and above but not 15 per cent of pay subject to<br \/>\n              exceeding Rs.1200.       minimum of Rs.100 and a<br \/>\n                                       maximum of Rs.160.\n<\/p>\n<p>      (iii)   Above Rs.1200               12 per cent. Of pay subject to a<br \/>\n                                          minimum of Rs.160 and a<br \/>\n                                          maximum of Rs.250.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                     A harmonious reading of Rule 4 A of Rules, 1979 and Rule<br \/>\n                 47 (2) (a) of Rules, 1976 would fresco that if a person employed<br \/>\n                 in a regular work-charged establishment dies while in service,<br \/>\n                 his family cannot be deprived of the pension which it would be<br \/>\n                 entitled for by virtue of Rule 4 A of Rules, 1979.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     In view of above the decision taken by the respondent<br \/>\n                 authority depriving the petitioner of the family pension on the<br \/>\n                 anvil that her husband did not complete 10 years of service in<br \/>\n                 regular work-charged establishment is without any basis and is<br \/>\n                 hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to settle family<br \/>\n                 pension in favour of the petitioner within a period of three<br \/>\n                 months from the date of communication of this order.<br \/>\n                 Petitioner would also be entitled for interest at the rate of 6%<br \/>\n                 from the date of entitlement till final payment.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     In the result petition is allowed to the extent above.<br \/>\n                 However, no costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                           (SANJAY YADAV)<br \/>\n                                                              J U D G E<br \/>\nVivek Tripathi\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madhya Pradesh High Court Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 W.P.NO.3495\/2009 (S) 27.8.2010 Shri Sanjay K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.N. Mishra, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent State. Grievance put-forth by the petitioner in the present petition is against non-grant of family pension in lieu of [&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":[8,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3754","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madhya-pradesh-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - 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\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-04T11:09:57+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\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-04T11:09:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1076,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madhya Pradesh High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-04T11:09:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 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":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - 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\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-04T11:09:57+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\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-04T11:09:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010"},"wordCount":1076,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madhya Pradesh High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010","name":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-04T11:09:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sampat-bai-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-27-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.Sampat Bai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 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\/3754","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=3754"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3754\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3754"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3754"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3754"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}