{"id":43235,"date":"1996-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-01-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996"},"modified":"2019-02-22T18:24:50","modified_gmt":"2019-02-22T12:54:50","slug":"dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","title":{"rendered":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1996 SCC  (7) 206, \t  JT 1996 (1)\t462<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: N G.T.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Nanavati G.T. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nDR. RANJANA AGRAWAL\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t16\/01\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nNANAVATI G.T. (J)\nBENCH:\nNANAVATI G.T. (J)\nRAY, G.N. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1996 SCC  (7) 206\t  JT 1996 (1)\t462\n 1996 SCALE  (1)473\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t    WITH<br \/>\n\t       CIVIL APPEAL NOS 2104-05\/1996<br \/>\n\t  (arising out of SLP(C)Nos.2157-58\/1995)<br \/>\nUnion of India &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>V.\n<\/p>\n<p>Dr. Ranjana Agrawal<br \/>\n\t\t      J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nNANAVATI,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>     These three appeals arise out of the judgment and order<br \/>\npassed by  the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative<br \/>\nTribunal  in  O.A.No.2559\/1993\tand  in\t Review\t Application<br \/>\nNo.186\/1994. Dr. Ranjana Agrawal (hereinafter referred to as<br \/>\nthe `appellant&#8217;) has filed one combined appeal whereas Union<br \/>\nof India  (hereinafter referred to as the &#8216;respondents&#8217;) has<br \/>\nfiled two  separate appeals  &#8211; one  against the judgment and<br \/>\norder passed  in the O.A. and the other against the judgment<br \/>\nand order  passed  in  the  Review  Application.  The  short<br \/>\nquestion  that\tarises\tin  these  appeals  is\twhether\t the<br \/>\nTribunal was  right in\tholding that  the assessment made by<br \/>\nthe Agricultrual  Scientists Recruitment Board (ASRB) of the<br \/>\nwork done  by the  appellant during  the relevant period was<br \/>\narbitrary and  then directing the respondents to promote the<br \/>\nappellant   as\t  S-3\tScientist    w.e.f.   1.1.1985,\t  as<br \/>\nrecommendations to  that effect were made by the Head of the<br \/>\nDepartment and\tthe  Director  of  the\tIndian\tAgricultural<br \/>\nStatistics Research Institute, under whom she was working.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant joined the Indian Council of Agricultural<br \/>\nResearch (ICAR)\t in 1972  as a Statistical Investigator. She<br \/>\nwas made  Junior Statistician in 1974. Agricultural Research<br \/>\nService (ARS)  was constituted\tw.e.f. 1.10.1975,  with\t the<br \/>\nobject of  giving merit promotion to the Scientists, without<br \/>\ntheir facing  competition from\tothers and  on the  basis of<br \/>\ntheir own performance. The appellant was inducted therein as<br \/>\nS-1 Scientist.\tThe ARS\t Rules provide that the scientist in<br \/>\nARS is to be assessed on a five yearly basis for considering<br \/>\nhim for\t promotion to  the next\t higher grade\/giving advance<br \/>\nincrements on  the basis  of his\/her  performance  for\tthat<br \/>\nperiod. The appellant was assessed accordingly for promotion<br \/>\nfor the\t first five-yearly  period 1974-1979;  and, on being<br \/>\nrecommended by\tthe ASRB  she was  promoted as S-2 Scientist<br \/>\nw.e.f. 1.7.1980. She would have become due for consideration<br \/>\nfor her\t next promotion\t as S-3 Scientist on completion of 5<br \/>\nyears on  30.6.85. Though, according to the rules, seniority<br \/>\nhas no\trelevance for  promotion, some\tScientists  who\t had<br \/>\njoined earlier\tbut were  not promoted\tbefore their juniors<br \/>\ncame to be promoted, filed a Writ Petition in the Delhi High<br \/>\nCourt and  as a result of the decision given in that case on<br \/>\n5.3.1987 the  appellant and  other S-1 Scientists were given<br \/>\npromotions as S-2 Scientists w.e.f. 1.7.1976. As a result of<br \/>\nthe pendency of the said Writ Petition and for certain other<br \/>\nreasons, the Assessment Committee of the ASRB had not met in<br \/>\n1986 nor  could it  meet till  15.7.1992. The  appellant and<br \/>\nother S-1  Scientists were  then called upon to submit their<br \/>\nperforms for  assessment  for  the  period  ending  on\t31st<br \/>\nDecember, 1981\tas they\t had completed\tfive  years  as\t S-2<br \/>\nScientists on  30.6.1981; but,\tin view\t of  the  subsequent<br \/>\ndevelopments,  some  S-2    Scientists\thad  also  submitted<br \/>\nperforms and  other information regarding their work for the<br \/>\nyears 1980  to 1985.  The Assessment  Committee assessed the<br \/>\nwork  of   all\tthose\tS-2  Scientists\t  and  made  certain<br \/>\nrecommendations. The  appellant was  not recommended  either<br \/>\nfor promotion  from 1.7.1982  or for advance increments. The<br \/>\nappellant and  4 other\tScientists feeling  aggrieved by the<br \/>\nsaid assessment\t made representations  to the  ICAR but they<br \/>\nwere rejected  on 24.9.1993.  Thereafter the  appellant\t was<br \/>\ncalled\tupon  to  submit  yearly  supplementary\t information<br \/>\nregarding her  work for\t the years  1982, 1983 and 1984. The<br \/>\nAssessment Committee then met on 27.7.93 and after assessing<br \/>\nthe work  of the appellant recommended one advance increment<br \/>\nfor the\t year 1982  and two  advance increments for the year<br \/>\n1984. The  appellant feeling aggrieved by the earlier result<br \/>\nof  assessment\tmade  on  15.7.1992  and  rejection  of\t her<br \/>\nrepresentations against\t the same and also by the assessment<br \/>\nmade in\t September, 1993 challenged them before the Tribunal<br \/>\non the\tground that  the assessment was made in an arbitrary<br \/>\nmanner on  the first  occasion and that the Assessment Board<br \/>\nwas not properly constituted on the second occasion.\n<\/p>\n<p>     From the  material placed before it, the Tribunal found<br \/>\nthat out  of five  S-2 Scientists,  including the appellant,<br \/>\nDr. A.K.Srivastava had submitted his assessment performs for<br \/>\nthe period  1972 to 1982, Dr. Bathla had submitted two self-<br \/>\nassessments -one  for the  period 1976 to 1981 and the other<br \/>\nfor the period 1980 to 1985. Dr. Shivtar Singh had filed two<br \/>\nself-assessments &#8211;  one for  the period 1976 to 1981 and the<br \/>\nother for  the period  from 1.7.1982  to 31.12.1985  and the<br \/>\nappellant had  filed her self-assessment for the period 1976<br \/>\nto 1981.  The Assessment  Committee of the ASRB which met on<br \/>\n15.7.1992  had\t considered  the  said\tmaterial  and  other<br \/>\nrelevant information  placed before  it\t and  had  made\t its<br \/>\nrecommendations with respect to all those Scientists for the<br \/>\nyears 1982,  1983 and 1984. The Tribunal also found that for<br \/>\nthe years  1982, 1983 and 1984 no yearly self-assessment was<br \/>\ncalled\tfor   from  the\t  appellant.  With  respect  to\t Dr.<br \/>\nA.K.Srivastava the  Tribunal held that as he was adjudged an<br \/>\noutstanding Scientist  on the basis of the assessment of his<br \/>\nwork for  the period 1977 to 1982 he was rightly cleared for<br \/>\npromotion to the Grade of Scientist S-3 w.e.f. 1.1.1983. It,<br \/>\ntherefore, did\tnot find  any fault with the assessment made<br \/>\nby the said Committee of the work of Dr. A.K.Srivastava. The<br \/>\nTribunal, however,  held that  whereas in case of Dr. Bathla<br \/>\nand Dr.\t Shivtar Singh two self-assessments and that too for<br \/>\noverlapping  periods   were  permitted\t to  be\t  filed\t and<br \/>\nconsidered, in case of the appellant her self-assessment for<br \/>\nthe period  1976 to 1981 only was considered and she was not<br \/>\ncalled upon  to submit\ther yearly assessments for the years<br \/>\n1982, 1983  and\t 1984.\tThis,  according  to  the  Tribunal,<br \/>\namounted to  adopting different\t norms\tqua  the  Scientists<br \/>\nsimilarly situated and was also in breach of the rules. Even<br \/>\nafter holding that the assessment made by the Board was thus<br \/>\nvitiated it  did not  set at  naught the promotion\/giving of<br \/>\nadditional increments to other S-2 Scientists but thought it<br \/>\nfit to direct the respondents to promote the appellant as S-<br \/>\n3 Scientist w.e.f. 1.1.1985.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The contention  that the  1993 Board  was not  properly<br \/>\nconstituted was\t not raised before us and it does not appear<br \/>\nto  have   been\t pressed   before  the\tTribunal.  The\tonly<br \/>\ncontention raised  by the  appellant before  us is  that the<br \/>\nTribunal should have directed the respondents to promote the<br \/>\nappellant as S-3 Scientist with effect from 1.7.1982 instead<br \/>\nof 1.1.1985  as she  was recommended for such promotion both<br \/>\nby the\tHead of\t the Department\t and also by the Director of<br \/>\nthe Institute  wherein she  was working\t right from the year<br \/>\n1982. On the other hand, what the respondents have contended<br \/>\nis that\t it was\t not legal  and proper\tfor the\t Tribunal to<br \/>\ndirect the  respondents\t to  promote  the  appellant  w.e.f.<br \/>\n1.1.1985. as  at the  most the\trespondents could  have been<br \/>\ndirected  to   reconsider  the\tcase  of  the  appellant  in<br \/>\naccordance with the rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>     As\t stated\t  earlier,  the\t  ASRB\twas  constituted  on<br \/>\n1.10.1975 and  the appellant  and other\t similarly  situated<br \/>\nScientists were made a part of that service and trated as S-<br \/>\n1  Scientists.\t They  became\tdue  for  consideration\t for<br \/>\npromotion to the next grade of S-2 Scientists on expiry of 5<br \/>\nyears in  1980. The  appellant was  in fact  considered\t and<br \/>\npromoted  as   S-2  Scientist  w.e.f.  1.7.1980.  The  other<br \/>\nScientists were also similarly considered and promoted as S-<br \/>\n2 Scientists  on or  about the\tsame time.  They would\thave<br \/>\nbecome due  for consideration  for the next promotion to the<br \/>\ngrade of  S-3 Scientists\/additional increments on completion<br \/>\nof 5  years in\t1985. However, the aforesaid decision by the<br \/>\nDelhi High  Court resulted  in their  quick promotion as S-2<br \/>\nScientists  w.e.f.   1.7.1976.\tAll  these  S-2\t Scientists,<br \/>\nhowever,   could    not\t  be\tconsidered    for    further<br \/>\npromotion\/additional increments\t earlier than  15.7.1992  in<br \/>\nview of\t the circumstances  pointed out above. The Board had<br \/>\ncalled for  the assessment performs from these Scientists in<br \/>\nMarch 1992.  The appellant  rightly submitted her assessment<br \/>\nperforms for  the period  1976 to  1981 but  Dr. Bathla\t and<br \/>\nothers thought\tit wiser not only to submit their assessment<br \/>\nperforms for  that period  but also  for the  period 1980 to<br \/>\n1985 as\t they would  have become  due for  consideration for<br \/>\npromotion to the higher grade of S-3 Scientists on the basis<br \/>\nof their  performs for the 5 years from 1980 to 1985 but for<br \/>\nthe aforesaid  decision of  the Delhi  High Court  and their<br \/>\nquick promotion\t as  S-2  Scientists  w.e.f.  1.7.1976.\t The<br \/>\nTribunal was  unable to\t appreciate this action of other S-2<br \/>\nScientists and\tproceeded to  hold that consideration of the<br \/>\nsaid material  was not only discriminatory and arbitrary but<br \/>\nalso in\t breach of  the rules. The Tribunal rightly observed<br \/>\nthat  the   Board  should   have  given\t  the  appellant  an<br \/>\nopportunity to submit her yearly performs for the subsequent<br \/>\nperiod upto  December 1984  so as  to  see  that  all  those<br \/>\nScientists were\t considered on\tan equal basis. However, the<br \/>\nTribunal   failed    to\t  appreciate\tthat   though\t the<br \/>\nrepresentations made by the appellant against the assessment<br \/>\nmade  in   September  1992   were  rejected,  not  only\t the<br \/>\nassessment of  the appellant but the assessment of all other<br \/>\nS-2 Scientists\twas cancelled  by the ICAR as it had come to<br \/>\nits notice  that the  relevant material\t for considering the<br \/>\nappellant for  the years  1982, 1983 and 1984 was not before<br \/>\nthe ASRB.  The Tribunal\t did take  note of the fact that the<br \/>\nresult of  the appellant  was declared\tnull  and  void\t but<br \/>\nfailed to appreciate that the result of other S-2 Scientists<br \/>\nwas also  declared null\t and void and whatever promotions or<br \/>\nadditional increments  were given  to them were on the basis<br \/>\nof fresh  consideration by the Board in the year 1993. Those<br \/>\nScientists had\tapplied to the Board to review its decision;<br \/>\nand  that  was\tdone  in  accordance  with  the\t rules.\t The<br \/>\nappellant did  not apply  for a\t review probably because she<br \/>\nhad not\t submitted her\tself-assessments for the years 1982,<br \/>\n1983 and  1984. After  the  result  of\ther  assessment\t was<br \/>\ndeclared null  and void,  the Board  told her  to submit her<br \/>\nself-assessment performs  for the years 1982, 1983 and 1984.<br \/>\nShe did\t submit\t those\tperforms  and  appeared\t before\t the<br \/>\nAssessment Committee of the Board when it met again in 1993.<br \/>\nWhen the  appellant was\t again considered  in 1993  she\t was<br \/>\nconsidered  on\tthe  same  basis  on  which  the  other\t S-2<br \/>\nScientists were\t considered. In\t case of  Scientists of ICAR<br \/>\npromotion to  next higher grade is not given on the basis of<br \/>\ncomparative assessment\tbut by\tassessment of their own work<br \/>\nduring the 5 year period in one grade. The procedure adopted<br \/>\nby the\tBoard at  that time  was neither  arbitrary  nor  in<br \/>\nbreach of the rules. The Tribunal failed to appreciate these<br \/>\nrelevant  aspects   of\tthe  matter.  Therefore,  its  order<br \/>\ndeserves to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In the  result, the  appeal filed\tby the\tappellant is<br \/>\ndismissed and  the appeals  filed  by  the  respondents\t are<br \/>\nallowed. The order of the Tribunal directing the respondents<br \/>\nto give\t promotion to  the appellant as S-3 Scientist w.e.f.<br \/>\n1.1.1985 is set aside. In view of the facts of the case, the<br \/>\nparties are directed to bear their own costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 Equivalent citations: 1996 SCC (7) 206, JT 1996 (1) 462 Author: N G.T. Bench: Nanavati G.T. (J) PETITIONER: DR. RANJANA AGRAWAL Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/01\/1996 BENCH: NANAVATI G.T. (J) BENCH: NANAVATI [&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-43235","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>Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - 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\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\" \/>\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=\"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-22T12:54:50+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-22T12:54:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\"},\"wordCount\":1849,\"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\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\",\"name\":\"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-22T12:54:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996\"}]},{\"@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":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - 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\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-22T12:54:50+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996","datePublished":"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-22T12:54:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996"},"wordCount":1849,"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\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996","name":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-22T12:54:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ranjana-agrawal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-16-january-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dr. Ranjana Agrawal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 16 January, 1996"}]},{"@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\/43235","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=43235"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43235\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}