{"id":44490,"date":"2009-09-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009"},"modified":"2016-05-03T23:20:39","modified_gmt":"2016-05-03T17:50:39","slug":"shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                               .....\n<\/pre>\n<p>                                           F.No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2009\/000617<br \/>\n                                      Dated, the 16th September, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appellant       : Shri K.L. Bablani<\/p>\n<p>Respondents : Directorate General of Vigilance, Customs &amp; Central<br \/>\n              Excise.\n<\/p>\n<p>      This matter was heard through videoconferencing (VC) on<br \/>\n02.09.2009 with the appellant present at NIC VC facility at Nagpur and<br \/>\nthe respondents, represented by Shri Avinash Pushkarna, Joint<br \/>\nCommissioner &amp; Appellate Authority and Shri Rajender Kumar, Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner &amp; CPIO, at the Commission&#8217;s New Delhi office, from<br \/>\nwhere the Commission conducted its hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.     The present second-appeal is for the limited purpose of disclosure<br \/>\nof file-notings in a vigilance file on the basis of which an administrative<br \/>\nwarning to the appellant was issued as listed in appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nRTI-application dated 06.02.2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.     Respondents declined to disclose the file-notings in the vigilance<br \/>\nfile arguing that it was important to preserve and protect the identity<br \/>\nof the officers making notings in sensitive files in order to allow them<br \/>\nthe space and the freedom to record their notes unencumbered by<br \/>\nscrutiny of the very person against, or in respect of, whom such notes<br \/>\nmight have been recorded. They urged that in a hierarchical system, a<br \/>\nfile-noting is the expression of informed opinion of each officer<br \/>\nauthorized to process the file as an aid to the competent authority, who<br \/>\nmakes the final decision. These officers perform an unenviable task \u23af<br \/>\nvery often examining the conduct of their friends and colleagues \u23af and<br \/>\nwithout the protection of confidentiality, they would never be able to<br \/>\ndischarge their responsibility in an unbiased, fearless and objective<br \/>\nmanner. The net upshot of these psychological pressures on the officers<br \/>\nwill be that decision-making will cease to be objective and governance<br \/>\nwill suffer.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.    Appellant argued that if the respondents wished to protect the<br \/>\nidentity of the officers recording the notes, they might very well sever<br \/>\nthe identities of those officers from the documents provided to the<\/p>\n<p>AT-16092009-04.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                Page 1 of 4<\/span><br \/>\n appellant. He objected to any attempt to block disclosure of a part of<br \/>\nthe file, i.e. the file-noting.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.     CPIO responded by saying that given the complex to-and-fro<br \/>\nmovement of files and recordings on the file-notes, deleting the names<br \/>\nof the officers recording the notes will not be easy. Apart from the<br \/>\nabove, even if the names are hidden, it would not be difficult to<br \/>\nidentify the officer making the note on the basis of his position on the<br \/>\nhierarchy and even his handwriting. Transcribing the notes wholesale<br \/>\nwill be both a time-consuming and an expensive process.\n<\/p>\n<p>Decision:\n<\/p>\n<p>6.     This is not the first case in which employees of a public authority<br \/>\nhave demanded disclosure of file-notings in matters of vigilance and<br \/>\ndisciplinary enquiries held against them. In most cases, the purpose is<br \/>\nto find out the identity of those officers who had taken favourable and<br \/>\nthose who had taken unfavourable view of the conduct of such<br \/>\nemployees in recording the file-notes. The employees are aware that it<br \/>\nis these notes, which eventually lead to decisions for, or against, them<br \/>\nby the competent authority and want, for their own different purposes,<br \/>\nto gain access to the identities of those recording the notes as well as<br \/>\nthe notes recorded to pursue their agendas about, or against, the<br \/>\nofficers recording those notes. It has happened in a few cases that<br \/>\neven bona-fide comments made in such sensitive files by officers, when<br \/>\ndisclosed to the person in respect of whom such comments were made,<br \/>\nbrought retribution to the officer recording the note in the shape of a<br \/>\ncourt preceding, a notice for damages and so on. In some cases, even<br \/>\nintimidation was resorted to. Frequently, officers recording such notes<br \/>\nwere juniors to those in respect of whom the case was being processed.<br \/>\nNaturally, no officer recording the note wanted his identity to be<br \/>\ndisclosed lest he became the victim himself later at the hands of the<br \/>\nsenior person, whose conduct it became his duty to examine at some<br \/>\nstage. Confidentiality of note-files, therefore, is an entirely wholesome<br \/>\nprinciple conducive to good governance.            Any compromise with<br \/>\nobjectivity in processing matters extant in the file, is potentially<br \/>\ndamaging to governance by exposing those entrusted with the charge of<br \/>\nprocessing the matter to, undue, and sometimes, intimidating, scrutiny<br \/>\nby interested parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.     It is my belief, therefore, that a public authority which is<br \/>\nauthorized to hold file-notings in sensitive files, such as vigilance and<br \/>\ndisciplinary matters, confidential under the provisions of Section 124 of<br \/>\nAT-16092009-04.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                               Page 2 of 4<\/span><br \/>\n the Indian Evidence Act can also hold such documents (file-notings)<br \/>\nconfidential under Section 11(1) of RTI Act read with Section 2(n), on<br \/>\nsatisfying certain conditions. Section 2(n) of RTI Act, which states that a<\/p>\n<p>      &#8220;third party&#8221; means a person other than the citizen making a<br \/>\n       request for information and includes a public authority.\n<\/p>\n<p>renders a public authority holding the information a &#8220;third-party&#8221; in<br \/>\nrespect of the confidential information it holds. Since the information<br \/>\nsatisfies the requirement of being a third-party information, it being<br \/>\nconfidential as well as it comes within the scope of Section 11(1), which<br \/>\nreads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;Where a Central Public Information Officer &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. intends to<br \/>\n      disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request<br \/>\n      made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a<br \/>\n      third party and has been treated as confidential by that third<br \/>\n      party, the Central Public Information Officer &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. shall,<br \/>\n      within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written<br \/>\n      notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the<br \/>\n      Central Public Information Officer &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;intends to disclose<br \/>\n      the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third<br \/>\n      party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding<br \/>\n      whether the information should be disclosed, and such<br \/>\n      submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a<br \/>\n      decision about disclosure of information:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             Provided that except in the case of trade or commercial<br \/>\n      secrets protected by law, disclosure may be allowed if the public<br \/>\n      interest in disclosure outweighs in importance any possible harm<br \/>\n      or injury to the interests of such third party.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>8.    Since the matter comes squarely within the purview of Section<br \/>\n11(1) being a confidential third-party information, the reason why it can<br \/>\nbe disclosed is that it is in public interest and, not otherwise. It needs<br \/>\nto be proved that public interest supersedes the protected interest if<br \/>\nsuch information were to be disclosed.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.    In the present case, I do not find that the requirement of public<br \/>\ninterest is satisfied. The appellant&#8217;s urge to know &#8216;who-recorded-what&#8217;<br \/>\nin the file-noting of the file relating to disciplinary proceedings against<br \/>\nhim, serves no public interest but is rooted only in the appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nAT-16092009-04.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                Page 3 of 4<\/span><br \/>\n eagerness and, his curiosity to access those file-notings and, more<br \/>\nparticularly, their authors.\n<\/p>\n<p>10. I do not think that applying Section 10(1) and hiding the names of<br \/>\nthe authors of the file-notings will serve any purpose. As has been<br \/>\nrightly pointed out by the respondents, even without the authors&#8217;<br \/>\nnames, the identity of the authors of the notes could be disclosed by<br \/>\nreference to the hierarchies through which the file passed as well as the<br \/>\nhandwriting in which the notes were recorded.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. I, therefore, hold that there are substantial grounds not to<br \/>\ndisclose the information as requested by the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.   The appeal is, therefore, disallowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.   Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                          ( A.N. TIWARI )<br \/>\n                                              INFORMATION COMMISSIONER<\/p>\n<p>AT-16092009-04.doc<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                               Page 4 of 4<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 2009 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION &#8230;.. F.No.CIC\/AT\/A\/2009\/000617 Dated, the 16th September, 2009. Appellant : Shri K.L. Bablani Respondents : Directorate General of Vigilance, Customs &amp; Central Excise. This matter was heard through videoconferencing (VC) on 02.09.2009 with the appellant present at NIC [&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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-44490","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 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\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-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=\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-03T17:50:39+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-03T17:50:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1243,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-03T17:50:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 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":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 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\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-03T17:50:39+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-03T17:50:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009"},"wordCount":1243,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009","name":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of ... on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-03T17:50:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-k-l-bablani-vs-directorate-general-of-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of &#8230; on 16 September, 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\/44490","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=44490"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44490\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44490"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44490"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44490"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}