{"id":42243,"date":"2009-03-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009"},"modified":"2015-12-08T16:58:01","modified_gmt":"2015-12-08T11:28:01","slug":"suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                                    1\n\n             S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1037\/1997\n  Suresh Kumar Verma     Vs.      Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi\n                                  Vikas Bank Ltd. Chittorgarh &amp; Anr.\n\n\n               Date of Order            ::    26.03.2009\n\n\n                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR\n\n      Mr R.N. Upadhyaya, for the petitioner.\n      Mr Vinay Kothari, for the respondent-Bank.\n                                 ...\n\n\n      As per the recommendation made by the Departmental Promotion\n\nCommittee, by an order dated 4.1.1997 the Secretary, Chittorgarh\n\nSahakari Bhumi Vikas Bank Ltd. Chittorgarh promoted respondent No.2\n\nas Assistant Secretary. While challenging the same the contention of\n\nlearned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Rule 8 of the Sahakari\n\nBhumi Vikas Bank Chittorgarh Rules, 1990 (hereinafter to be referred to\n\nas, `the Rules of 1990') the criteria prescribed for promotion to the post\n\nof Assistant Secretary is seniority-cum-merit but the respondents\n\nerroneously adopted the criteria of merit, and as such, promotion made\n\nunder the order impugned dated 4.1.1997 is bad. In alternative it is also\n\nurged that even by adopting the criteria of merit it is the petitioner who\n\nshould have been given promotion as Assistant Secretary.\n\n\n\n\n      Per contra, as per the respondent-bank the criteria prescribed for\n\npromotion under Rule 8 of the Rules of 1990 is required to be read in\n\nconsonance with the eligibility prescribed under the Schedule I\n                                      2\n\nappended to the Rules aforesaid. It is pointed out by learned counsel\n\nfor the respondent-bank that under Rule 8 the criteria for promotion is\n\nseniority-cum-merit       for selection and to make such selections the\n\ncriteria of merit is prescribed under the Schedule appended with the\n\nRules. It is asserted that the criteria of seniority-cum-merit is required\n\nto be adopted only after making a selection on basis of merit among the\n\npersons eligible to be considered for promotion. So far as alternative\n\nargument of counsel for the petitioner is concerned it is urged that the\n\nDepartmental Promotion Committee considered service record of five\n\ncandidates who were in zone of consideration and on basis of service\n\nrecord the respondent No.2 was found meritorious amongst all, and\n\ntherefore, his candidature was recommended for promotion to the post\n\nof Assistant Secretary.\n\n\n\n\n      Heard counsel for the parties.\n\n\n\n\n      Rule 8 of the Rules of 1990 prescribes that, \"For purposes of\n\nrecruitment to the category of employees for promotion, a selection\n\nstrictly on seniority cum merit shall be made from among all the persons\n\neligible for such promotion under the provisions of the service rules. The\n\nlist of such candidates working on the first day of calendar year will be\n\nconsidered for promotion.\" Schedule 1, appended with the Rules of\n\n1990, prescribes basic educational qualification, experience and other\n                                     3\n\neligibilities necessary for recruitment by way of promotion as well as by\n\nway of direct recruitment.   As per the Schedule aforesaid the eligibility\n\nfor promotion is \"merit only\" and promotion is required to be made\n\nfrom among the Branch Secretaries, Supervisors and Accountants.\n\n\n\n\n       Rule 8 and Schedule I appended to the Rules of 1990 prima facie\n\ngives an impression that two contradictory criteria are prescribed for\n\nmaking appointment on different posts by way of promotion. However,\n\non minute examination of the scheme of promotions the position\n\nemerges is   quite different.   Rule 8, as a matter of fact, relates to\n\nmaking selection strictly on basis of seniority-cum-merit.       Meaning\n\nthereby, for making promotion to the post of Assistant Secretary at the\n\nfirst instance a selection is required to be made from among the Branch\n\nSecretaries, Supervisors and Accountants as per the criteria of seniority-\n\ncum-merit. After making such selection merit of all the persons is\n\nrequired to be assessed. The respondents, therefore, first selected the\n\npersons from the pool of Accountants, Branch Secretaries and\n\nSupervisors as per the criteria of seniority-cum-merit and then\n\nconsidered their merit for promotion.      As such, while selecting the\n\npersons for placement in zone of consideration the criteria given under\n\nRule 8 was adopted and to give promotion from among the persons\n\nplaced in zone of consideration, the criteria given under Schedule I was\n\nadopted.\n                                    4\n\n\n\n      In view of whatever said above the respondents have adopted a\n\nmode as per Rules, while making promotions to the post of Assistant\n\nSecretary.\n\n\n\n\n      I also do not find merit in the alternative argument advanced by\n\nlearned counsel for the petitioner that even by adopting the criteria of\n\nmerit the petitioner should have been promoted. The respondents in\n\npara 21 of reply to the writ petition have specifically averred that\n\nperformance of the respondent No.2 was assessed as most meritorious,\n\nand therefore, promotion was accorded to him. The contents of para 21\n\nreferred above deserves to be quoted below:\n\n       \"That the averments contained in para F\/7 are totally\n       irrelevant. It is submitted that the over-all performance\n       of the petitioner was rated as satisfactory for the year\n       1994-95. It is further submitted that out of the five\n       years record, the petitioner had only one out-standing\n       record and the remaining part of the petitioner's record\n       was only satisfactory. As against this the performance\n       of respondent No.2 for all the five years has been rated\n       to be outstanding. As against this the petitioner has\n       also suffered two punishments and looking to the record\n       of five years the Departmental Promotion Committee\n       recommended the candidature of respondent No.2 for\n       promotion to the post of Assistant Secretary.\"\n\n\n\n\n      From perusal of the averments referred above it is clear that the\n\nrespondent No.2 was rated outstanding      for five years where as the\n\npetitioner's working was only satisfactory and he also suffered with\n                                               5\n\n          certain penalties. In view of that apparently I do not find any error in\n\n          treating the respondent No.2 more meritorious vis a vis the petitioner.\n\n\n\n\n                For the reasons stated above I do not find any merit in this\n\n          petition for writ. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.\n\n                                                            (GOVIND MATHUR), J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>Jgoyal&#8217;\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 2009 1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1037\/1997 Suresh Kumar Verma Vs. Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas Bank Ltd. Chittorgarh &amp; Anr. Date of Order :: 26.03.2009 HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr R.N. Upadhyaya, for the petitioner. Mr Vinay [&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":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42243","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - 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\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-08T11:28:01+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\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-08T11:28:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":26,\"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\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-08T11:28:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 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":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - 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\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-08T11:28:01+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\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-08T11:28:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009"},"wordCount":26,"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\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009","name":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas ... on 26 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-08T11:28:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-kumar-verma-vs-chittorgarh-sahakari-bhumi-vikas-on-26-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Suresh Kumar Verma vs Chittorgarh Sahakari Bhumi Vikas &#8230; on 26 March, 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\/42243","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=42243"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42243\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42243"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42243"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42243"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}