{"id":44783,"date":"2006-02-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-02-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006"},"modified":"2018-08-16T16:38:46","modified_gmt":"2018-08-16T11:08:46","slug":"rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","title":{"rendered":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 2006 (6) BomCR 220, 2006 (3) MhLj 502<\/div>\n
Author: V Daga<\/div>\n
Bench: V Daga<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
V.C. Daga, J.<\/p>\n
Page 0866<\/p>\n
1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of  the Constitution of India, at the instance of the  aggrieved Assistant Teacher, aggrieved and  dissatisfied by the order of the School Tribunal,  Mumbai, passed in Appeal No. MUM\/132\/1997 on  17.4.2002, whereby order of termination dated  14.10.1997 issued by the respondent No.1 came to be  upheld.\n<\/p>\n
FACTS:\n<\/p>\n
2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was  appointed on probation for 2 years as Assistant  Teacher. It is also not in dispute that the  petitioner belongs to S.C. category and holds  M.A.B.Ed degree. It is also not in dispute that  before completion of probation period, services of the petitioner came to be terminated by giving him  one month’s notice indicating therein that his work  was not satisfactory. It is also not in dispute  that during the probation period he was served with  memo dated 3.10.1997 with further memos issued from  time to time. The School Tribunal after considering  the submissions advanced by the parties to the  appeal came to the conclusion that termination order  dated 14.10.1997 was in accordance with law and that  the petitioner was not entitled to reinstatement  with full backwages with consequential benefits.\n<\/p>\n
The aforesaid order of the School Tribunal  is the subject matter of challenge in this writ  petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution  of India.\n<\/p>\n
RIVAL SUBMISSIONS:\n<\/p>\n
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the  petitioner submits that the order of termination is  bad in law as it was not preceded by regular enquiry  or opportunity of being heard. She further submits  that order of termination casts a stigma as such it  could not have been upheld by the Tribunal. She  placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in  the case of V.P. Ahuja v. State of Punjab<\/a> , wherein the Apex Court has observed that a probationer, or a temporary servant, is also  entitled to certain protection and his services  cannot be terminated arbitrarily; in a punitive  manner without complying with the principles of  natural justice. She, thus, prayed for setting  aside impugned order of the School Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for  the respondent Nos.1 and 2 -school management  submits that the above decision is not applicable to  the Page 0867 facts of the present case in view of the  subsequent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of  Rajastan State Road Transport Corporation and Ors.  v. Zakir Hussain<\/a> , wherein the  Apex Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
 29.The respondent is a temporary  employee of the Corporation and a  probationer and not a government servant  and, therefore, is not entitled for any  protection under Article 311 of the  Constitution. He was a party to the  contract. In view of the fact that the  respondent was appointed on probation and  the services were terminated during the  period of probation simpliciter as the same  were not found to be satisfactory, the  appellant Corporation is not obliged to hold  an enquiry before terminating the services.  The respondent being a probationer has got  no substantive right to hold the post and  was not entitled to a decree of declaration  as erroneously granted by the lower courts  and also of the High Court.”  The Counsel for the respondent thus prayed for  dismissal of the petition with costs.\n<\/p>\n
CONSIDERATION:\n<\/p>\n
5. Before considering rival submissions  extracted hereinabove, it is necessary to examine  observations and findings recorded by the School  Tribunal in the impugned order. Relevant portions  in the impugned order read as under:\n<\/p>\n
The appellant admitted that during  the period of two years probations, he  received only one memo dtd. 3.10.1997. The  appellant also admitted that he has  expressed apology for the act done by him  inadvertently. He also also admitted that  the lessons were observed by the Principal.  Further appellant admitted his signature  below the remarks in lesson No.8and admitted  observation of lesson of the appellant dtd.  19.7.1997, 26.9.1997, 9.10.1997.\n<\/p>\n
In support of their contentions they  have filed the documents on record i.e.  Exh.. 1 to 9(a) which goes to show that his  work was not satisfactory which was brought  to the notice of the appellant by taking his  signature in each observation memos.  Moreover, it is also seen that the appellant  accepted the serious mistakes committed by  him with apology to treat as unsatisfactory  work to attract termination of the services  of appellant. It is also mentioned that  Exh. 2,2b, 4,5 & 6 attached with written  submission of respondents bears the  signature of appellant which are dt.  18.9.96, 19.9.96, 22.10.96, 8.9.96, 19.9.97  respectively during the probation period of  appellant.\n<\/p>\n
In the present appeal respondent  No.1 is Secretary, Kshetra Kulotpana Maratha  Samaj, Parel and respondent No.2 is the  principal of the K.M. Samaj Junior College  of Education. Respondent No.1 Secretary of  the K.M. Samaj Trust runs the respondent  No.2-K.M. Samaj Junior College of  Education. According to respondent No. 1  and 2 they pleaded in their written  statement in para (f) that School Committee  (5)_  has already submitted report Page 0868 through C.E.  O. to Managing Committee dt. 9.10.97 as  per MEPS Rules, 1981 Schedule A(3)(g). It  is seen from para 9 of the written statement  of respondents that alleged termination is  not issued by Principal but it is issued by  the Secretary of the K.M. Samaj Trust.\n<\/p>\n
The appellant has filed a document  along with appeal memo and letter dt.  30.10.97 issued by Principal Respondent No.2  to the appellant about the appellant’s  unsatisfactory work and appellant was given  an opportunity to improve but no progress  was found in the behaviour of the appellant.  Therefore, the Principal through School  Committee reported the matter to the  Managing Committee and its letter received  by appellant on 9.10.97.\n<\/p>\n
6. The School Tribunal has recorded categorical  findings that the work of the petitioner was found  unsatisfactory with the result respondent was  required to issue several memos and warnings to him.  But there was no improvement in his work. Therefore  respondent was compelled to terminate the services  of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
7. The management is entitled to terminate the  services of the probationer at any time during the  period of probation on the ground of his  incompetency or unsatisfactory work or behaviour as  an Assistant Teacher. The relevant provision of  section 5(3) reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
 If in the opinion of the management  the work of any probationer during the  period of his probation is not satisfactory  the management may terminate his services at  any time during the period after giving him  one months notice or salary of one month in  lieu of notice.\n<\/p>\n
The petitioner during the probation period did not  acquire any right to the post. If; on being found  suitable; had he been regularised; only then he  would have acquired the right to continue in the  post. The very object of the probation is to test  the suitability; and if the appointing authority  finds that the candidate is not suitable, it,  certainly, has power to terminate the services of  employee. Under these circumstances, the reasons  mentioned constitutes motive and not foundation for  termination of service.\n<\/p>\n
In W.P. No.1580\/1997 (Smt. Mangla Abaji Sawant v.  The President, Lorekar Aikyawardhani Mandal, Lone &  ors.<\/a>) a Division Bench of this Court has observed as  under:\n<\/p>\n
 Petitioner was appointed as Jr.Clerk  on 16.6.1982 on probation of 2 years. His  services were terminated by an order dt.  3.6.1994 on account of unsatisfactory  performance. School Tribunal took a view  that there was no error in passing the order  of termination, that the order of  termination of service of petitioner who was  a probationer casts no stigma on her. There  is no reason to interfere with the order of  termination of the services of petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
8. The respondent has also produced original  minute book to demonstrate that the order of  termination was preceded by resolution adopted by  the management. He has also produced an affidavit  filed by Education Officer, wherein he has admitted  receipt of additional copies of memos forwarded to  their office which were issued to the petitioner  from time to time to bring to his notice, about his  unsatisfactory work. The impugned order of  termination nowhere casts stigma but it only  mentions that the services of the petitioner are  being terminated for his unsatisfactory work.\n<\/p>\n
Page 0869<\/p>\n
9. In the above view of the matter, order of  termination was issued in accordance with the  provisions of the MEPS Act. If provisions of the  Act are complied with then no fault can be found  with the order of termination. The provisions of  the said Act do not contemplate holding of enquiry  if services of probationer are to be dispensed with.  From time to time, memos were issued to the  petitioner so as to give an opportunity to improve.  In this view of the matter, compliance of the  principles of natural justice is apparent on the  face of the record. The judgment of the Apex Court  referred to and cited by learned Counsel for the  petitioner is not applicable to the facts and  circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n
In the result, petition is dismissed. Rule  is discharged with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 Equivalent citations: 2006 (6) BomCR 220, 2006 (3) MhLj 502 Author: V Daga Bench: V Daga JUDGMENT V.C. Daga, J. Page 0866 1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, at the instance of the aggrieved Assistant […]<\/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":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-44783","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-16T11:08:46+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-16T11:08:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1510,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\",\"name\":\"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-16T11:08:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-16T11:08:46+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006","datePublished":"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-16T11:08:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006"},"wordCount":1510,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006","name":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-16T11:08:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajkumar-onkar-jagtap-vs-secretary-kshatrakulotpana-on-14-february-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajkumar Onkar Jagtap vs Secretary, Kshatrakulotpana on 14 February, 2006"}]},{"@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\/44783","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=44783"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/44783\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=44783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=44783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=44783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}