{"id":58821,"date":"2009-07-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009"},"modified":"2018-04-16T20:41:47","modified_gmt":"2018-04-16T15:11:47","slug":"smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Manjula Chellur B.V.Nagarathna<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
WP No.30965 OF 2003<\/p>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATA1i\u00a7@ :A. x
\ncnzcurr BENCH AT  _ [ ”  <\/p>\n
DATED THIS THE 28??’ rm?\n<\/p>\n
PRESEK;1″~.\u00a7  V:   X ”\n<\/p>\n
THE HoN’m”.}:     A<\/p>\n
THE I-ION’BLE B:Ii'{VS,_g}fIfSv71L’IV?;3Igi\u00ab:’\u00a7w\\ief:, }i’;f;GARATHNA<\/p>\n
WRIT Pgt\u00e9\u00e9wl\u00e9m {A2603 {S–KA’I’)<\/p>\n
W\/0 Prakash –Gaj\u00a2ndraga.c1akar,
\nAged abCmt’%36 mm.\n<\/p>\n
Working as Typist-c”L1n11-cierk,<\/p>\n
 _ Fieid R”6SOl}I’C{*3S \u00abCentre,
\n   …… ..\n<\/p>\n
\u00bb   …PE’I’I’i’IONER<\/p>\n
  RaI2ganath.S.Jois, Advocates)<\/p>\n
   ”  }:.9″I’he Deputy Ei\ufb01irecztor of<\/p>\n
 ” “PL1’\u00a5::i_ic Instructions 8:.
\n? Designated District project
\nCo–ordi11ator,
\n{Department of Public Instrucrtiozls,
\nKoppal District-58323 1.\n<\/p>\n
WP Nox30965 OF’ 2003<\/p>\n
2. The Project Co–ordinator,
\nField Resources Centre,
\nYeibarga taluk,<\/p>\n
Koppal ciistrict.\n<\/p>\n
(By Smt.K.Vid3’avati,Q0ve:’r1n3e\u00a71tfX&1I}ee\u00e9ite)”:”   <\/p>\n
This Writ petition is \ufb01ledjurisier A1*tiC1C$,~226 85 227
\nof the Constitution’ ._II1d.ia witt_1,a;’~–yrayer to quash the
\niII}\u00a711\u00a7’lC(3 order dated EEO;-f}Efs1~..20O2ff vide A;tmexure~A3 as
\narbitrary, discifiminatgry .a11t_i {(io1atiV’\u00e9\u00a7’jOf*~Artic1e 14, 16(1)
\nan\u00e9 31}. of the ‘C,onsfit1itiQ11_ef.’VI\u00ab1;diaarid having not been
\npreceded by” aziiyr  130:” eziquiry’  contemplated under
\nrule 11′? get the:1{;C.S\u00ab.._V{C.’\u00a33.A’;) ‘E11168, 1957.<\/p>\n
j;\u00a7etjtit\u00a711..Veetrxi1<;g,v"\u00a7on for hearing, this day,
\n 'J___, made the following:\n<\/p>\n
te:DRDER<\/p>\n
~  uvHeardV’ti’;e.V1_e\u00a7reed counsel for the petitiener and so<\/p>\n
‘ \ufb01iso  C:oia’e1_*nment Advocatet<\/p>\n
     %<\/p>\n
itlndispute\u00e9 facts in the present case are, the<\/p>\n
peiiti\u00a3\u00a7ner4′.Vwas appointee} as a Clerk-cum-Typist at Field<\/p>\n
A’ Re.$ettrces Centre at Yelimrga taluk in Kappa} districtt, by<\/p>\n
}\u00a7i19\u00a3ue ef an appeimxnent letter dated 18.06.1998 along<\/p>\n
    At   <\/p>\n
WP Ne-.30965 OF 2003<\/p>\n
with three others on a conisgolridated salary of Rs…2,600\/_<\/p>\n
per month. It is also not in dispute
\nappointment. was on contract, purely on
\nTherefore, no morzetary    _
\nappointment was \ufb01xed. Af.:ee\u00a5’g
\n29.06. 2993 she conenuedirgoesgwiee  3o\u00a7.oe_.e2eo2
\nher services were te1j:t1h1atCr..’!:.VVV..”\u00a7?he-~..xyaetfeiievesi of duties<\/p>\n
from 24.08.2002.  .’:’t}i_e.AV:.”u11disputed facts<\/p>\n
pertaining no t.r;e;..pre;;e::t  e  <\/p>\n
 \u00b0  petjtiorzet’, there was no<\/p>\n
opportufxiity of  gven te her before issuance of<\/p>\n
 ‘~  _ A;i_\u00a3\u00a7e>;1.tre.:A3 teiaieizia\ufb01ng her S\u20acI’ViC\u20ac3S, therefore, there is<\/p>\n
   principles of natural justice falling under<\/p>\n
 of the Constitution of India. With these<\/p>\n
” eonterttione she approached the Karnataka<\/p>\n
 .%\u00ae\u00a7’1ir1ist1″ative ‘I’r’ibu:r2a1. Qver and above these facts, she<\/p>\n
  stated that one 3%z\u00a3r.Shaz1kaI’appa Ramji, Project Cow<\/p>\n
erdinator, harassed her mentally and physica\ufb02y and he is<\/p>\n
WP NG(30955 OF 2003<\/p>\n
the one behind the order of termination for
\nThe learned Member of the Karnatakah
\nTribunal by referring to coI1teI3:i\ufb01’s”‘V cg”
\nthat on 26.06.2000 itself _t1_1e
\nPreject. Co–ordin.at0r wrote  ‘let
\nDirectox’ of Public Qesig\ufb01atee District
\nProject Co\u00abor\u00e9i}.jat.{)r A Z”  of another
\nTypist\u00bbcum\ufb01VC\u00a7}ei’3\u00a7:}1s    in attending
\nas it was;     Tt13.e” evork to complete the
\n . . , . _, ,  ll ( _  .\n<\/p>\n
 ieai\ufb02ed Member, under these<\/p>\n
eir{:1;:i:{1;\u00bb:1:aI1ee’s;,  25\u00a2’ reepondent seeking pennissian of<\/p>\n
 ,At;i1e\\’ is\u00e9v\/”‘;\u00a7es.\u00a7\u00a7oz:dent 1:9 terminate the services of applicant<\/p>\n
iA?\u00e9i$_VVjA:is\u00a7i\u00a33e{iV::;”}9Ie also refers\u00bb to the exchange of notices<\/p>\n
be\u00a3i\u00a5*ee\u00a3\u00a7’.t\u00a5’1e parties even in the month of Oeteber 2001.<\/p>\n
 \u00e9iis, the Tribunal di\u00e9 not pmeeed to discuss what<\/p>\n
\u00a7:3a:Ls’AA:ne:1t\u00a7ened in the netice if: Octeber 2001 and the<\/p>\n
Herder does not indicate that the T\ufb01bunal had an Qccasion<\/p>\n
WP No.30965 OF’ 2003<\/p>\n
te go through the contents of the sai\u00e9 notiee}-V
\nthe Tribunal held that there is no
\napplication of the applicant is i
\nArticle 311 of the Constitetion ef.
\nlearned Member of the  tee  being
\nnot a permanent 1.  as it was
\non contract, which if;   basis, there
\nwas no   to terminate her
\nservices    eh\u00e9eiiireules \u00a5_1I}d\u20acI’ proviso to
\n   of India. Hence, the
\nappiicaiieii  :’bei:\u20aciiemisse\u00e9. Aggrieved by the said<\/p>\n
oifdger ef duismieeai ef ‘the application, the present Writ<\/p>\n
 ‘petitief; is ‘\ufb01led before us.\n<\/p>\n
  it was not a reguiar or permanent<\/p>\n
a\ufb01pei:ii:.t1de}<1t against any sanctioned post. The very<\/p>\n
 ,, 'prejeet itself was a temporary ene. Severe} persons were<\/p>\n
R'-aepeinted 03:1 temporary basis including the present writ<\/p>\n
 petitioner to discharge the duties of a Cierk~cu1z1-Typist.<\/p>\n
"\\'\\J'\u00a7  5:"   . A<\/p>\n
WP No.309t55 OF 2003<\/p>\n
The consideration hereunder would be not 13::<\/p>\n
violation of Service Rules or
\ndomestic enquity applicable   7<\/p>\n
contention of the p\u20actiti{)i1CIf;iS, she. was no1;..t:'Ve11"giV.ef1ea11.L<\/p>\n
ogaportunity of being heard""before she fees ierxeinated,
\nwhich amounts to'    V\ufb01riueiplee Hef natural<\/p>\n
justice.\n<\/p>\n
6.    ‘ said to have been
\nexchanged.   not before the Court. As
\ne1reac:i”\u00a7%&S\u00a5;.\u00a7gted_  .indieatiI1g in the preamble of<\/p>\n
AI1nexure\u00a52’\u00a7,3″ a:1V;>’\u00a7_)1:A1’\u00a3–,  the statement dated 25.11.1998,<\/p>\n
 V’  _ ne#i:1’ii;ing.A is meritim-1-ed in the C.-rde1′ ef termixaation dated<\/p>\n
  ..::f1’\u00a7;ere is lot of time gap betiveen 1998 and<\/p>\n
 If —  were intending ti) terminate the services<\/p>\n
  to the misconduct of 1998 in 2002, there is no
\n prefger expiarxation why four years time was taken to take<\/p>\n
_ g\u00e9ueh a decision. Therefere, we are of the opinion that the<\/p>\n
WP NQ30965 OF 2008<\/p>\n
Tribunal was not justi\ufb01ed in connecting \ufb02leee’ to<\/p>\n
the cause of termination referred to at    <\/p>\n
‘7. It is Well settled tlaaii\u00e9\u00e9  ”\n<\/p>\n
siznpliciter without
\nchance of challenging’   was
\nattached or there   giving reasonable \u00bb
\nopportunity “of:     alleged stigma.\n<\/p>\n
What. the     the language used
\nin a  to a strigna or just
\n‘te:*z:e\u00a73Z;:1Ae;1:iQr;v  ” ffemnina\ufb01on simpliciter’ would<\/p>\n
mean ttiai VVf).:job’afin’i1er was unsuitable on un\ufb01t for the<\/p>\n
   is{hic1a1V”‘i’:~e..xvas appointed. In that situation one<\/p>\n
   was atiached 1:0 such an order of<\/p>\n
‘teiininati\u00e9_ne:;tho12gh er\u00e9er of terminaticm simpliciter might<\/p>\n
 have ,};i\u00e9%;ei1 for sort of misconduct. if the misconduct is net<\/p>\n
  eat in the er\u00e9er of stigtna still it would amount to<\/p>\n
__50rder of tennina\ufb01on sirnpliciter. Therefore, the Apex<\/p>\n
Court has, time and again, stated that even though if} the<\/p>\n
WP N0.3096.S QF 2003<\/p>\n
order of termiriation stigma is implicit sti\ufb02 if
\ndoes not indicate the details of such
\ncannot interfere with the said   Ifgie ‘ 1’.
\nalso Wei} established ‘fll\u00e9it,
\ntermiiiation order attaehe\u20ac;:”.~~5oIIie’~–  tiie
\nprinciples of naturei_”justiee:_ .._autei1ia’i:iea1Iy come
\ninto pie-13:.  in the order of
\nteII:1inatiei1?__’:vie’:;2i;    important to epine
\nwhether   efi\ufb01eiples of natural justice
\nor Iiet.    facts, rzothixig is piaeed
\nbeforeiiiis:  Elie present petitioner was given<\/p>\n
 ef xbeing heard regarding her irreguiar<\/p>\n
. *attenV6:\u00a7;:1ee~–._Vbeeause the reason for her tennination is<\/p>\n
 ~. __ai.”Annexure–A3 as irregular atiendanee to the<\/p>\n
 once it refers to same lend of misconduct,<\/p>\n
  A’ she iifas entitled to have a hearing befere the order ef<\/p>\n
 teimitiatien. Even though the misconduct was the cause<\/p>\n
H of termination, if the same was net indieated at<\/p>\n
AI}1’1f3X{1I’f3-A3, it would have amcmnteei to ‘simplieiter’ and<\/p>\n
WP’ N0.i30965 OF’ 2008
\n: 10 :<\/span><\/p>\n
9. Accordingly, writ petition is a11ow\u00a2r;f
\nA3 dated 23.08.2002 is set aside.
\nauthority is at liberty to  ‘
\naccordance with the prm\u00a2_duf\u00e9”–  the E <\/p>\n
observations afresh.\n<\/p>\n
In View of the”4″\ufb01\u00a7g;:t   else is already
\nappointed ix}   in the year 2002
\nitself, we    .10 complete the whole
\npr0c\u00a2Vsss”s:?fV.Vi\u00a7}:;VJ;Li1: the date of receipt of
\ncertift\u00e9d   If; is perizinent to mention here<\/p>\n
that’ in e:\u00a7a;~:;@ th6; \u00a7)<-$t\ufb011\u00bbtiO~;3:er is succcitssful in the enquiry to<\/p>\n
 v  _   'hr:-1*,"she W11} be sntitied to the bene\ufb01ts af<\/p>\n
 _ me 'o{1{:,(_;b;ti'c_.V "\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n
Sd\/~
\nJUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 2009 Author: Manjula Chellur B.V.Nagarathna WP No.30965 OF 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATA1i\u00a7@ :A. x cnzcurr BENCH AT _ [ ” DATED THIS THE 28??’ rm? PRESEK;1″~.\u00a7 V: X ” THE HoN’m”.}: A THE I-ION’BLE […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-58821","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Parimala W\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - 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\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-16T15:11:47+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Parimala W\\\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-16T15:11:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1318,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt Parimala W\\\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-16T15:11:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Parimala W\\\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 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":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - 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\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-16T15:11:47+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-16T15:11:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009"},"wordCount":1318,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009","name":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash ... vs The Deputy Director Of Public ... on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-16T15:11:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-parimala-wo-prakash-vs-the-deputy-director-of-public-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Parimala W\/O Prakash … vs The Deputy Director Of Public … on 28 July, 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\/58821","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=58821"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58821\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58821"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58821"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58821"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}