{"id":89587,"date":"2006-12-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-12-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006"},"modified":"2016-07-21T00:43:22","modified_gmt":"2016-07-20T19:13:22","slug":"rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","title":{"rendered":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWA No. 2306 of 2006(A)\n\n\n1. RAJANI GOPAL, D\/O.GOPALAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER,\n\n3. MURALEEDHARAN, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.A.ABDUL SALAM\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.RAMACHANDRAN\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER\n\n Dated :18\/12\/2006\n\n O R D E R\n               M. RAMACHANDRAN & A.K.BASHEER, JJ.\n\n                ----------------------------------------------\n\n                        W.A.NO. 2306  of 2006\n\n                ----------------------------------------------\n\n              Dated this the 18th day of December, 2006\n\n\n                              J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
Ramachandran, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
               Appellant was the petitioner in the writ petition and<\/p>\n
she sought for a direction to be issued to the respondents. Her<\/p>\n
request for transfer to Kuthiathodu as Senior Accountant of the<\/p>\n
Sub Treasury was being consistently overlooked by the second<\/p>\n
respondent   for   no   valid   reasons.         According  to   her,   the   third<\/p>\n
respondent had been remaining in the post in violation of norms<\/p>\n
and appropriate directions were called for.<\/p>\n
       2.      The   learned   Judge   had   held   that   in   the   matter   of<\/p>\n
transfer and postings, except under exceptional circumstances,<\/p>\n
the   court  may not  intervene.    It   was  however  held   that  that  it<\/p>\n
would   be   open   to   the   petitioner   to   pursue   the   representations<\/p>\n
which   have   been   pending.     In   the   appeal   filed,     Mr.Salam,<\/p>\n
counsel   for   the   appellant   contends   that   it   was   a   case   where<\/p>\n
interference   was   required.       During   the   course   of   the   writ<\/p>\n
petition,  a  further  request  had  been  made,  and  it  is   submitted<\/p>\n
that   by   order   dated  11.9.2006,   it  had   been   rejected.     As   done<\/p>\n
earlier,   the   Department   had   taken   a   view   that   the   third<\/p>\n
respondent belongs to the  category of Scheduled Caste   and in<\/p>\n
WA NO. 2306 OF 2006<\/p>\n
                                      :-2-:\n<\/p>\n
\nview   of   G.O.(P)   No.11\/90\/P&ARD   dated   5.5.1990   and  G.O.(P)<\/p>\n
No.12\/04\/P&ARD   dated   10.9.2004,   he   could   not   have   been<\/p>\n
transferred.              Mr.   Salam   points   out   that   this   was   an<\/p>\n
erroneous view.  He submits that apart  from general norms in<\/p>\n
respect   of   Departments,   additional   norms   had   been<\/p>\n
introduced and were in operation.   He refers to Ext.P4 special<\/p>\n
norms concerning the officers of the Treasury Department.  It<\/p>\n
is highlighted that the employees were not to be retained for<\/p>\n
more than three years in a treasury.   In respect of treasurers,<\/p>\n
they   were   not   to   continue   for   more   than   three   years   in   the<\/p>\n
treasury   and   in   respect   of   the   other   officers,   it   was   to   be<\/p>\n
ensured   that   no   person   continued   in   any   particular   post   for<\/p>\n
more than three years.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       3.       According to the counsel, when the appellant had<\/p>\n
returned after maternity leave, she was entitled to a posting<\/p>\n
in   consonance   with   a   request   as   provided   by   norms.<\/p>\n
However,   she   was   overlooked   at   that   time.     It   is   further<\/p>\n
submitted   that   the   Government   Orders   relied   on   by   the<\/p>\n
District Treasury Officer while disposing of the representation<\/p>\n
itself were inapplicable or in any case were subject to general<\/p>\n
orders.   The   protractive   provisions   were   to   be   interpreted   as<\/p>\n
WA NO. 2306 OF 2006<\/p>\n
                                     :-3-:\n<\/p>\n
\nsubservient   to   the   other   norms   and   there   was   no   privilege<\/p>\n
preserved   whereby   the   Scheduled   caste   employees   were   to<\/p>\n
be   declared   as   entitled   to   remain   in   a   sensitive   post   in<\/p>\n
violation   of   the   general   norms.     He   has   also   a   case   that<\/p>\n
because   of   the   later   orders,  the   benefit  given   by   such   order<\/p>\n
(Ext.P1) was to be considered as not to be in force.<\/p>\n
       4.     Although   notice   was   served   on   the   third<\/p>\n
respondent,   there   was   no  appearance.     Government   Pleader<\/p>\n
submits   that   it   would   be   ensured   that   norms   are   observed<\/p>\n
and no officer will be preferred or subjected to prejudice.  The<\/p>\n
respondents   have   to   ensure   that   there   is   no   discrimination<\/p>\n
meted   out   when   norms   are   applied.     We   find   that   the<\/p>\n
directives issued by the Government to change the officers in<\/p>\n
the   Treasury   Department   is     for       sound   reasons   viz.,   that<\/p>\n
persons who handle the Government funds in a station should<\/p>\n
not be permitted to continue in the selfsame post indefinitely.<\/p>\n
It   may   not   be   in   their   interest   as   well   as   Government’s<\/p>\n
interest,   as  unknowingly affinities may develop,  pattern may<\/p>\n
set in, and ultimately, it may not be advisable.  We are afraid,<\/p>\n
it   may   not   be   possible   to   hold   that   this   stipulation   stands<\/p>\n
relaxed in respect of any specified category. A contrary view<\/p>\n
WA NO. 2306 OF 2006<\/p>\n
                                       :-4-:\n<\/p>\n
\nwould be against public interest. The appellant has therefore,<\/p>\n
according   to   us,   made   a   strong   case   for   interference   as   her<\/p>\n
claims are sidelined arbitrarily.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        5.       We   direct   that   in   supersession   of   all   orders<\/p>\n
passed, the first and second respondents should ensure that<\/p>\n
the   appellant   is   accommodated   at   Kuthiathodu   as   Sub<\/p>\n
Treasury   Officer   subject   of   course   to   any   other’s   superior<\/p>\n
claims,   and     as   per   her   request   at   the   earliest.   In   any  case,<\/p>\n
before the academic year 2007-08 starts, the postings are to<\/p>\n
be carried out.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        The writ appeal is disposed of as above.<\/p>\n
                                                              sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
\n                                             M. Ramachandran, Judge<\/p>\n
                                                              sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
\n                                                       A.K.Basheer, Judge<\/p>\n
Mbs\/<\/p>\n
                                -True Copy-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                              P.A.to Judge.\n<\/p>\n
\nWA NO. 2306 OF 2006<\/p>\n
                                         :-5-:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                  M. RAMACHANDRAN &<\/p>\n
                                                      A.K.BASHEER, JJ<\/p>\n
                                         ——————————————<\/p>\n
                                                   W.P.(FC).NO. OF 200<\/span><\/p>\n
                                             ——————————————<\/p>\n
                                                      J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
WA NO. 2306 OF 2006<\/p>\n
                       :-6-:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                DATED:   -11-2006<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WA No. 2306 of 2006(A) 1. RAJANI GOPAL, D\/O.GOPALAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, … Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, 3. MURALEEDHARAN, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, For Petitioner :SRI.K.A.ABDUL SALAM For […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-89587","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 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\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-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=\"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-20T19:13:22+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-20T19:13:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\"},\"wordCount\":773,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\",\"name\":\"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-20T19:13:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 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":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 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\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-20T19:13:22+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006","datePublished":"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-20T19:13:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006"},"wordCount":773,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006","name":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-12-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-20T19:13:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajani-gopal-vs-the-director-of-treasuries-on-18-december-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajani Gopal vs The Director Of Treasuries on 18 December, 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\/89587","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=89587"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89587\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=89587"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=89587"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=89587"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}