{"id":94080,"date":"2008-09-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-08-30T08:34:51","modified_gmt":"2018-08-30T03:04:51","slug":"c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 5560 of 2008(J)\n\n\n1. C.T.SEETHI KOYA,THAZHAPUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR\n\n3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER\n\n4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER\n\n5. COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT\n\n6. V.P.MUHAMMED,TAJ MAHAL HOUSE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHARAM.P\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI\n\n Dated :19\/09\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                           V. GIRI, J.\n         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                    W.P.(C).5560 of 2008 J\n         - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n         Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
        The      petitioner          challenges           Ext.P10  by<\/p>\n
which he has black listed and prevented from being<\/p>\n
awarded any contract.\n<\/p>\n
        2. In the counter affidavit, it is stated<\/p>\n
as follows:\n<\/p>\n
              “On scrutiny of the part bills and<\/p>\n
       the vouchers enclosed therein has found<\/p>\n
       suspicious and hence requested to KGST<\/p>\n
       Department for further verification and<\/p>\n
       genuines of the bill.             Meanwhile finance<\/p>\n
       (Inspection          Wing        NTF)       Department<\/p>\n
       inspected the bill and verified along<\/p>\n
       with KGST Department.                After enquiry,<\/p>\n
       the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance)<\/p>\n
       reported      that      the    bill      in    question<\/p>\n
       (Ext.P5) was not issued by the dealer<\/p>\n
       and it is fabricated and printed by the<\/p>\n
       contractor himself and the same is a<\/p>\n
       false    document       and    suggested        to   take<\/p>\n
       urgent action against the contractor as<\/p>\n
       specified in Ext.P9.            Since the work was<\/p>\n
       awarded to the petitioner and he himself<\/p>\n
       signed     the    agreement        before      the     PWD<\/p>\n
       authority to cary out the work according<\/p>\n
       to the guidelines of PWD, and therefore<\/p>\n
       the contractor colluded with Power of<\/p>\n
       Attorney holder 6th respondent and made<\/p>\n
       the   fabricate        documents        to    grab     the<\/p>\n
       public money, hence both are liable.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
W.P.(C).5560 of 2008
\n                           :: 2 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n                It is submitted that petitioner has<\/p>\n
         appointed     a    Power    of    Attorney<\/p>\n
         V.P.Muhammed      S\/o.Ahammedkutty,    the<\/p>\n
         respondent No.6 in this writ petition )<\/p>\n
         and executed the agreement thereto on<\/p>\n
         17th   December,  2005.     In  the   said<\/p>\n
         agreement is specifically stated that “I<\/p>\n
         hereby agree that all acts, deeds and<\/p>\n
         things done by my said attorney shall be<\/p>\n
         construed as acts, deeds and things done<\/p>\n
         by me and I undertake to ratify and<\/p>\n
         confirm all and whatsoever that my said<\/p>\n
         attorney shall lawfully do or cause to<\/p>\n
         be done for me by virtue of the powers<\/p>\n
         hereby given.” In the above circumstance<\/p>\n
         it is presumed that all acts done in<\/p>\n
         this regard by the 6th respondent is with<\/p>\n
         the concurrence of the petitioner, and<\/p>\n
         the    petitioner  cannot  be   shirk  his<\/p>\n
         shoulders from the responsibility.<\/p>\n
                It is submitted as instructed by<\/p>\n
         the Additional Chief Secretary (Finance)<\/p>\n
         necessary preventive measures has been<\/p>\n
         ordered    to kept  in abeyance   all  the<\/p>\n
         payment due to the petitioner and 6th<\/p>\n
         respondent and not to award any other<\/p>\n
         civil    works  to   them  until   further<\/p>\n
         orders.    Since the petitioner and the 6th<\/p>\n
         respondent are PWD contractors, they are<\/p>\n
         bound     to   keep   honest    with   the<\/p>\n
         government.     The action of making of<\/p>\n
         fabricated    documents  and  representing<\/p>\n
         before    the  Government  authority   and<\/p>\n
         acquiring public money without utilizing<\/p>\n
         for the public interest, the motive of<\/p>\n
         the petitioner and Power of Attorney is<\/p>\n
         only     making   loss   to   the   public<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).5560 of 2008
\n                            :: 3 ::\n<\/p>\n
\n         exchequer.     Only preventive action has<\/p>\n
         been taken to safeguard the interest of<\/p>\n
         the public and final action has not been<\/p>\n
         taken so far.      The petitioner filed a<\/p>\n
         representation     dtd.    15.12.07   this<\/p>\n
         petition is under consideration as the<\/p>\n
         enquiry    is proceeding   on the subject<\/p>\n
         matter.\n<\/p>\n
                Since   the   direction  issued  in<\/p>\n
         Ext.P10 is only a preventive measure so<\/p>\n
         as to safeguard the public exchequer and<\/p>\n
         hence     proper,   legal,   rational  and<\/p>\n
         according to natural justice.    It is not<\/p>\n
         at all an order of punishment.     Ext.P10<\/p>\n
         order is only a conditional order which<\/p>\n
         is subject to withdraw at the end of the<\/p>\n
         enquiry of the issue and hence there is<\/p>\n
         no need of affording the petitioner an<\/p>\n
         opportunity    of being   heard.   Further<\/p>\n
         agreement for the work is in the nature<\/p>\n
         of the petitioner,he is legally bound to<\/p>\n
         answer all the questions arises thereon.<\/p>\n
         It    is   humbly prayed   that  the  writ<\/p>\n
         petition may dismissed with cost.”<\/p>\n
           3. In the circumstances, since an enquiry<\/p>\n
is being conducted into the allegations regarding<\/p>\n
fabrication       of   the    documents,    it  is   only<\/p>\n
appropriate that such enquiry is completed at the<\/p>\n
earliest.\n<\/p>\n
           In    the   result, the    writ   petition is<\/p>\n
disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to ensure<\/p>\n
that the enquiry conducted against the petitioner<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).5560 of 2008
\n                            :: 4 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nreferred to above, is completed at the earliest,<\/p>\n
at any rate, within four months from the date of<\/p>\n
receipt of a copy of this judgment. After the<\/p>\n
enquiry, if it is found that the allegations have<\/p>\n
not   been     proved,    obviously, the order black<\/p>\n
listing the petitioner will not survive. It is<\/p>\n
open to the petitioner to seek payment of the<\/p>\n
amounts stated to be due to the petitioner for the<\/p>\n
work already completed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                       (V.GIRI)
\n                                        JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
sk\/-\n<\/p>\n
                   \/\/true copy\/\/<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 5560 of 2008(J) 1. C.T.SEETHI KOYA,THAZHAPUTHIYOTTIL HOUSE … Petitioner Vs 1. SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT … Respondent 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER 4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER 5. COMMISSIONER,COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT 6. V.P.MUHAMMED,TAJ MAHAL HOUSE For Petitioner […]<\/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-94080","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - 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\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-30T03:04:51+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\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-30T03:04:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":728,\"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\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\",\"name\":\"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-30T03:04:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - 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\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-30T03:04:51+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\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-30T03:04:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008"},"wordCount":728,"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\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008","name":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-30T03:04:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-t-seethi-koya-vs-secretary-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C.T.Seethi Koya vs Secretary on 19 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/94080","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=94080"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94080\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94080"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94080"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94080"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}