{"id":42180,"date":"1968-03-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1968-03-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968"},"modified":"2018-06-10T00:10:58","modified_gmt":"2018-06-09T18:40:58","slug":"state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","title":{"rendered":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1968 AIR 1113, \t\t  1968 SCR  (3) 363<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: R Bachawat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Bachawat, R.S.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSTATE\t  OF MYSORE AND ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSYED MAHMOOD AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n04\/03\/1968\n\nBENCH:\nBACHAWAT, R.S.\nBENCH:\nBACHAWAT, R.S.\nSHAH, J.C.\nMITTER, G.K.\n\nCITATION:\n 1968 AIR 1113\t\t  1968 SCR  (3) 363\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1974 SC 460\t (5,6)\n F\t    1975 SC1498\t (5)\n F\t    1987 SC1889\t (5)\n RF\t    1988 SC1069\t (5)\n\n\nACT:\nMysore State Civil Services General Recruitment Rules, 1957,\nr.  4(3)  (b)-Promotion to next grade-Persons  eligible\t not\nconsidered  and\t juniors in  seniority\tpromoted-High  Court\ndirects their promotion-Validity.,\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nRule  4(3)(b)  of the Mysore State  Civil  services  General\nRecruitment  Rules,  1957 requires promotion to be  made  by\nselection  on  the  basis of  seniority-cum-merit,  that  is\nseniority  subject  to\tthe  fitness  of  the  candidate  to\ndischarge the duties of the Post from among persons eligible\nfor  promotion.\t While making selections for  promotions  to\nthe posts of senior statistical assistants from the cadre of\njunior statistical assistants, the State Government did\t not\nconsider  the  case  of\t the  respondents  who\twere  junior\nstatistical  assistants,  and  published  a  list  promoting\npersons\t ranking  below\t them in point\tof  seniority.\t The\nrespondents  filed writ petitions, in which the\t High  Court\nrefused\t to  quash  the\t seniority  list  but  directed\t the\nappellant State to Promote the respondents as from the dates\non  which  their  juniors  were\t promoted  and\ttreat  their\npromotion as effective from that date.\tAllowing the appeal,\nthis Court,\nHELD : While making selections for promotion to the posts of\nsenior\tstatistical  assistants\t from the  cadre  of  junior\nstatistical  assistants\t in 1959, the State  Government\t was\nunder  a  duty to consider whether having  regard  to  their\nseniority   and\t fitness  they\tshould\tbe  promoted.\t The\npromotions  were irregularly made and they were,  therefore,\nentitled  to  ask the State Government to  reconsider  their\ncase.\tIn the circumstances, the High Court could  issue  a\nwrit  to the State Government compelling it to\tperform\t its\nduty  and  to  consider\t whether  having  regard  to   their\nseniority and fitness they should have been promoted on\t the\nrelevant  dates when officers junior to them were  promoted.\nInstead\t of  issuing  such a writ, the\tHigh  Court  wrongly\nissued writs directing the State Government to promote\tthem\nwith retrospective effect.  The High Court ought not to have\nissued\tsuch  writs without giving the State  Government  an\nopportunity in the first instance to consider their  fitness\nfor promotion in 1959. [365 B-D]\nPromotion  to the post of senior statistical  assistant\t was\nbased on seniority-cum-merit.  In spite of their  seniority,\nofficers junior to them could be promoted if they were unfit\nto discharge the duties of the post.  Promotion could not be\nclaimed\t as a matter of right by virtue of seniority  alone.\n[366 C-D]\n<a href=\"\/doc\/994342\/\">State  of  Mysore v. H. M. Ballary,<\/a> [1964]  7  S.C-.R.\t471,\ndistinguished.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 31 and  32<br \/>\nof 1968.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeals\t by special leave from the judgment and order  dated<br \/>\nJanuary 25, 1967 of the Mysore High Court in Writ  Petitions<br \/>\nNos. 774 and 2171 of 1965.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.   H.\t Dhebar,  Shyamala Pappu and S. P.  Nayar,  for\t the<br \/>\nappellants (in both the appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p>S.   S. Javali and M. Veerappa for respondent No.  (in\tboth<br \/>\nthe appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">364<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nBachawat, J. On the reorganisation of States on November  1,<br \/>\n1956,  the  services  of  Syed Mahmood\tand  Bhao  Rao\twere<br \/>\nallotted to the State of Mysore and they were employed there<br \/>\nas  junior statistical assistants.  On January 16, 1958\t the<br \/>\nHead of the Department of Statistics under the directions of<br \/>\nthe  Government\t of  State of Mysore  prepared\ta  tentative<br \/>\nseniority  list\t of  nongazetted staff\tof  that  department<br \/>\ntreating   junior   statistical\t  assistants   and    senior<br \/>\nstatistical  inspectors\t of the former State  of  Hyderabad,<br \/>\njunior\tstatistical assistants and senior compilers  of\t the<br \/>\nformer\t State\t of  Mysore,  statistical   assistants\t and<br \/>\nstatistical inspectors from Bombay and the head compiler  of<br \/>\nCoorg as holding the equivalent posts of junior\t statistical<br \/>\nassistants in the State of Mysore.  In 1959, before revising<br \/>\nthis tentative seniority list the State Government  directed<br \/>\nthat   all  the\t statistical  assistants   and\t statistical<br \/>\ninspectors  of Bombay State and the head compiler of  Coorg,<br \/>\nshould be treated and promoted as senior statistical  assis-<br \/>\ntants.\tAs a result of this direction officers ranking below<br \/>\nSyed Mahmood and Bhao Rao in the seniority list published on<br \/>\nJanuary\t 16,  1958 were promoted to the\t higher\t posts.\t  In<br \/>\nmakintheir promotions, the State Government did not consider<br \/>\nthe  fitness of Syed Mahmood and Bhao Rao for  promotion  at<br \/>\nall.   At  a much later date, they were promoted  as  senior<br \/>\nstatistical   assistants.   On\tMay  3,\t 1963,\t the   State<br \/>\nGovernment  published  a  revised  seniority  list   placing<br \/>\ninspectors from Bombay and head compilers from Coorg in\t the<br \/>\ncatecory of senior statistical assistants.  Syed Mahmood and<br \/>\nBhao Rao filed separate writ petitions in the High Court  of<br \/>\nMysore\tasking for appropriate writs quashing the  seniority<br \/>\nlist  published\t on  May 3, 1963, and  directing  the  State<br \/>\nGovernment  to consider their case for promotion  as  senior<br \/>\nstatistical   assistants  with\tretrospective  effect.\t  As<br \/>\nthe  .objections to the seniority list published on  May  3,<br \/>\n1963 were still under consideration by the State  Government<br \/>\nthe  High Court refused to quash this seniority list but  it<br \/>\ndirected  the State Government to promote Syed\tMahmood\t and<br \/>\nBhao  Rao as from the respective dates on which\t respondents<br \/>\njunior\t to  them  were\t promoted  as\tsenior\t statistical<br \/>\nassistants  and to treat such promotions as effective up  to<br \/>\nMay  3,\t 1963.\tThe State of Mysore has\t filed\tthe  present<br \/>\nappeals\t from  the orders directing the\t promotion  of\tSyed<br \/>\nMahmood and Bhao Rao after obtaining special leave.<br \/>\nPromotion  to the posts of senior statistical assistants  is<br \/>\nmade  from  the cadre of junior statistical  assistants\t and<br \/>\nprogress assistants.  Rule 4(3)(b) of the Mysore State Civil<br \/>\nServices  General  Recruitment\tRules,\t1957  requires\tsuch<br \/>\npromotions  to\tbe  made  by  selection\t on  the  basis\t  of<br \/>\nseniority-cum-merit,  that  is\tseniority  subject  to\t the<br \/>\nfitness of the candidate to discharge the duties of the post<br \/>\nfrom among persons eligible for promotion.  In 1959<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">365<\/span><br \/>\nthe seniority of junior statistical assistants was  governed<br \/>\nby  the seniority list published on January 16, 1958.\tSyed<br \/>\nMahmood\t and  Bhao Rao were junior  statistical\t assistants.<br \/>\nWhile making selections for promotion to the posts of senior<br \/>\nstatistical assistants from the cadre of junior\t statistical<br \/>\nassistants in 1959, the State Government was under a duty to<br \/>\nconsider  whether  having  regard  to  their  seniority\t and<br \/>\nfitness\t they should be promoted.  But\twithout\t considering<br \/>\ntheir  case  at all, the State\tGovernment  promoted  junior<br \/>\nstatistical assistants ranking below them in point of senio-<br \/>\nrity.\tThe promotions were irregularly made and they  were,<br \/>\ntherefore-,   entitled\tto  ask\t the  State  Government\t  to<br \/>\nreconsider their case.\tIn the circumstances, the High Court<br \/>\ncould issue a writ to the State Government compelling it  to<br \/>\nperform\t its duty and to consider whether having  regard  to<br \/>\ntheir  seniority and fitness they should have been  promoted<br \/>\non  the\t relevant dates when officers junior  to  them\twere<br \/>\npromoted.   Instead of issuing such a writ, the\t High  Court<br \/>\nwrongly\t issued\t writs\tdirecting the  State  Government  to<br \/>\npromote\t them  with retrospective effect.   The\t High  Court<br \/>\nought not to have issued such writs without giving the State<br \/>\nGovernment an opportunity in the first instance to  consider<br \/>\ntheir fitness for promotion in 1959.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.  Javali  submitted\tthat Syed Mahmood and  Bhao  Rao  by<br \/>\nvirtue of their seniority were entitled to promotion at\t the<br \/>\ntime  when  persons  junior  to\t them  were  promoted.\t The<br \/>\nargument  overlooks the fact that promotion to the  post  of<br \/>\nsenior\tstatistical  assistant was based  on  seniority-cum-<br \/>\nmerit.\tIn spite of their seniority officers junior to\tthem<br \/>\ncould be promoted if they were unfit to discharge the duties<br \/>\nof the post.  Promotion could not be claimed as a matter  of<br \/>\nright by virtue of seniority alone.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.  Javali argued that even in the case of promotion  based<br \/>\n,on seniority-cum-merit, an officer is entitled to promotion<br \/>\nby virtue of seniority alone, and he relied on the  decision<br \/>\nin  <a href=\"\/doc\/994342\/\">State of Mysore v. H. M. Bellary<\/a>(1).  In that  cast,  an<br \/>\nofficer of the Bombay Government was sent on deputation from<br \/>\nhis parent department to another department.  After long and<br \/>\nsatisfactory  service and a number of promotions in the\t new<br \/>\ndepartment, he was reverted to his parent department and was<br \/>\nposted\tin a lower grade though in the meantime\t an  officer<br \/>\nnext below him in the parent department had been promoted to<br \/>\na higher grade.\t The promotion to the higher grade was based<br \/>\non seniority-cum-merit.\t The Court held that under r.  50(b)<br \/>\nof  the Bombay Civil Services Rules and the circular of\t the<br \/>\nGovernment  of Bombay dated October 31, 1950, an officer  on<br \/>\ndeputation in another department on reversion to his  parent<br \/>\ndepartment  was entitled to be restored to the\tposition  he<br \/>\nwould have occupied in his parent department had he not been<br \/>\ndeputed.  Rule 50(b) treated the service of an<br \/>\n(1)  [1964] 7 S.C.R. 471.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">366<\/span><\/p>\n<p>officer on deputation in the new department as equivalent to<br \/>\nservice\t  in   the  parent  department.\t  As   he   rendered<br \/>\nsatisfactory  service and was considered fit  for  obtaining<br \/>\nincrements  and promotions in the new department, he  should<br \/>\nbe  deemed to be fit for promotion in the parent  department<br \/>\nand  was  entitled to promotion in that department  when  an<br \/>\nofficer next below him there was getting promotion based  on<br \/>\nseniority-cum-merit.   In  official language,  this  is\t the<br \/>\n&#8220;next  below rule&#8221; under which an officer on  deputation  is<br \/>\ngiven  a paper promotion and shown as holding a higher\tpost<br \/>\nin the parent department if the officer next below him there<br \/>\nis  being promoted.  In our opinion, this case\tis  entirely<br \/>\ndistinguishable.  It decided that under the relevant service<br \/>\nrules the fitness for promotion of an officer on  deputation<br \/>\nin  the\t new  department  was  equivalent  to  fitness\t for<br \/>\npromotion  in  the  parent department and  the\tofficer\t was<br \/>\nentitled  to  promotion in the parent  department  when\t the<br \/>\nofficer\t next below him there was obtaining promotion  based<br \/>\non seniority-cum-merit.\t But it is not an authority for\t the<br \/>\nproposition  that the officer on deputation is\tentitled  to<br \/>\npromotion  in either the new or the parent department  as  a<br \/>\nmatter of right by virtue of his seniority alone, or that he<br \/>\nshould\tbe deemed to be promoted whenever the  officer\tnext<br \/>\nbelow  him is being promoted.  Where the promotion is  based<br \/>\non seniority cum-merit the officer cannot claim promotion as<br \/>\na  matter of right by virtue of his seniority alone.  If  he<br \/>\nis  found unfit to discharge the duties of the higher  post,<br \/>\nhe  may be passed over and an officer junior to him  may  be<br \/>\npromoted.\n<\/p>\n<p>We  are of the opinion that the State Government  should  be<br \/>\ndirected  at  this  stage to consider the  fitness  of\tSyed<br \/>\nMahmood\t and  Bhao Rao for promotion in 1959.\tIf  on\tsuch<br \/>\nexamination  the  State Government  arbitrarily\t refuses  to<br \/>\npromote\t them,\tdifferent considerations would\tarise.\t The<br \/>\nState  Government would upon such consideration be  under  a<br \/>\nduty  to promote them as from 1959 if they were then fit  to<br \/>\ndischarge  the duties of the higher post and if it fails  to<br \/>\nperform its duty, the Court may direct it to promote them as<br \/>\nfrom 1959.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the result, we allow the appeals and set aside the orders<br \/>\npassed by the High Court.  We direct the State Government to<br \/>\nconsider whether Syed Mahmood and Bhao Rao should have\tbeen<br \/>\npromoted  to the posts of senior statistical  assistants  on<br \/>\nthe  relevant  dates  when  officers  junior  to  them\twere<br \/>\npromoted,  and if so, what consequential  monetary  benefits<br \/>\nshould\tbe allowed to them.  While granting  special  leave,<br \/>\nthis Court directed that the appellants shall pay the  costs<br \/>\nof   the  respondents  in  any\tevent.\t  Accordingly,\t the<br \/>\nappellants are directed to pay the costs of these appeals to<br \/>\nthe respondents.  One hearing fee.\n<\/p>\n<pre>Y.P.\t\t\t   Appeals allowed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">367<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 Equivalent citations: 1968 AIR 1113, 1968 SCR (3) 363 Author: R Bachawat Bench: Bachawat, R.S. PETITIONER: STATE OF MYSORE AND ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: SYED MAHMOOD AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04\/03\/1968 BENCH: BACHAWAT, R.S. BENCH: BACHAWAT, R.S. [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42180","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - 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\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\" \/>\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=\"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-09T18:40:58+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968\",\"datePublished\":\"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-09T18:40:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\"},\"wordCount\":1491,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\",\"name\":\"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-09T18:40:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968\"}]},{\"@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":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - 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\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-09T18:40:58+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968","datePublished":"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-09T18:40:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968"},"wordCount":1491,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968","name":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1968-03-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-09T18:40:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-anr-vs-syed-mahmood-and-ors-on-4-march-1968#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Mysore And Anr vs Syed Mahmood And Ors on 4 March, 1968"}]},{"@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\/42180","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=42180"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42180\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42180"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42180"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42180"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}