{"id":99049,"date":"2010-01-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010"},"modified":"2018-11-11T02:55:05","modified_gmt":"2018-11-10T21:25:05","slug":"anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n
Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010<\/div>\n
                                       1\n\n                                                            Court No.4\n\n                    Writ Petition No. 499(S\/B) of 2006\n\nAnand Kishore Jaiswal                                       Petitioner\n\n                                 Vs.\n\nThe State of U.P. and others                           Opposite parties\n\n                                 ----------\nHon'ble Sunil Ambwani, J.\n<\/pre>\n
Hon’ble Anil Kumar,J.\n<\/p>\n
      Heard      Sri Rajeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.<\/p>\n
Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.<\/p>\n
      By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner, who was<\/p>\n
working as Sub Registrar in the Department of Tax and Registration,<\/p>\n
has prayed for quashing the order dated 20.6.2005 awarding the<\/p>\n
adverse\/censor entry to the petitioner as well as order of reversion<\/p>\n
placing him in the lowest of the pay scale           and the order dated<\/p>\n
16.9.2005 by which he has been compulsorily retired from the service.<\/p>\n
      The Court had summoned the records including the proceedings<\/p>\n
of the Screening Committee.\n<\/p>\n
      Learned Standing Counsel has produced the records including the<\/p>\n
report of Screening Committee dated 25.7.2005. The report also<\/p>\n
considers the case of Sri Anand Kishore Jaiswal , the petitioner in this<\/p>\n
writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
      The Screening Committee found that in the year 1994-95, the<\/p>\n
petitioner’s integrity was not certified; prior to that, in the years 1984-85<\/p>\n
also his integrity was also not certified; apart from this, during the last<\/p>\n
three years, petitioner was punished on three occasions and by order<\/p>\n
dated 28.6.2005 he was reverted in the original of the pay scale. The
\n                                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
Screening Committee also found that there was hardly any possibility<\/p>\n
of improvement in him in the future.\n<\/p>\n
      The petitioner has not denied the fact that in the years 1984-85<\/p>\n
and 1994-95 his integrity was not certified. The documents produced<\/p>\n
by him,    were supplied to him on his requisition under        Right to<\/p>\n
Information Act . The annual entry of the petitioner for the year 2001-<\/p>\n
02, was also recorded as bad.\n<\/p>\n
      The perusal of the record shows though the order dated 25.6.2005<\/p>\n
by which petitioner was awarded punishment has been challenged in<\/p>\n
this writ petition, he has not challenged the separate order of the same<\/p>\n
date by which his one increment for a period of one year was directed<\/p>\n
to be withheld .\n<\/p>\n
      The Inspector General of Registration U.P., in the departmental<\/p>\n
inquiry in which the petitioner admitted charges nos. 8 and 9, punished<\/p>\n
him with reversion to the minimum of the pay scale of Rs. 6500\/-. He<\/p>\n
was also awarded a special adverse entry, to the effect that he was found<\/p>\n
negligent in keeping the registers updated without thumb impressions;<\/p>\n
negligent in returning the registered documents without signing on the<\/p>\n
receipts and withholding the documents illegally . He also found guilty<\/p>\n
to allowing outsiders to do the government work; delay in disposing of<\/p>\n
the copying fee and making overwriting in the minutes book.<\/p>\n
      It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the<\/p>\n
Screening Committee travelled beyond the material produced before<\/p>\n
it, and checked the entries beyond the relevant period for considering<\/p>\n
the records. The order dated 20.6.2005 was not communicated to him.<\/p>\n
He was not given sufficient time to file an appeal. He further submits
\n                                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
that both the orders dated 20.6.2005 as contained in annexure nos. 1,<\/p>\n
to the writ petition and annexure -12 to the counter affidavit are liable to<\/p>\n
be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
      The Petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in<\/p>\n
Writ Petition No. 64222 of 2005 ,Ram Briksha Prasad Vs. State of U.P.<\/p>\n
decided on 4.7.2006. In that case Sri Ram Briksha Prasad was also<\/p>\n
serving as Sub Registrar and and his records was also considered in the<\/p>\n
same meeting held on 25.7.2005, but he was allowed to continue in<\/p>\n
the service.\n<\/p>\n
      It is not denied by the petitioner       that his integrity was not<\/p>\n
certified in the years 1984-85 and 1994-95 and the he was punished<\/p>\n
three times in the three preceding years. The Screening Committee<\/p>\n
relied upon the order dated 20.6.2005 by which the petitioner was<\/p>\n
reverted to the original pay scale. The petitioner has not challenged the<\/p>\n
order dated 20.6.2005 reverting him to original pay scale in this writ<\/p>\n
petition. The screening Committee had sufficient material against the<\/p>\n
petitioner to form its opinion. Even otherwise, sufficiency or<\/p>\n
insufficiency of the adverse material cannot be a ground to challenge<\/p>\n
the decision of the competent authority for compulsorily retirement.<\/p>\n
      The argument that the petitioner did not have sufficient<\/p>\n
opportunity to file appeal against the order dated 20.6.2005, is also<\/p>\n
devoid of force as the order dated 20.6.2005 was duly served upon<\/p>\n
him. He neither mentioned it in the writ petition nor in the rejoinder<\/p>\n
affidavit.\n<\/p>\n
      The judgment in Ram Briksha Prasad case (Supra) is based upon<\/p>\n
the different facts . Sri Ram Briksha Prasad has filed an appeal which
\n                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
was pending on the date when the screening Committee has considered<\/p>\n
the matter of compulsory retirement and his representation was not<\/p>\n
considered by the Screening Committee .\n<\/p>\n
      We further find that the endorsement of receipt made by the<\/p>\n
petitioner as both the orders 20.6.2009 as contained as annexure 1, to<\/p>\n
the writ petition as well as annexure 11 to the counter affidavit show<\/p>\n
that the orders were duly received by the petitioner on 28.6.2005. The<\/p>\n
petitioner cannot therefore deny the facts alleged in the writ petition that<\/p>\n
the order was not communicated to him by the date when the Screening<\/p>\n
Committee considered his case for compulsory retirement.<\/p>\n
      The reliance upon Rule 5 of the Uttar Pradesh           Government<\/p>\n
Servants (Disposal of Representation against Adverse Annual<\/p>\n
Confidential Reports and Allied Matters) Rules 1995 by the petitioner<\/p>\n
is of no assistance to the petitioner as the petitioner has participated in<\/p>\n
the previous inquiry and that he was given minor punishment by the<\/p>\n
orders. Rule 5 of the Rules 1995 is not applicable, to the matter under<\/p>\n
Rule 56 (c ) of the U.P. Fundamental Rules contained in Volume II part<\/p>\n
2 to 4 of the U.P. Financial Hand Book under which the decision of the<\/p>\n
compulsory retirement is taken.\n<\/p>\n
      We do not find any good ground to interfere in the writ petition as<\/p>\n
sufficient material was available before the Screening Committee to<\/p>\n
form an opinion and to be relied upon by the competent authority that<\/p>\n
the petitioner was no longer useful in the service and the he was<\/p>\n
required to be retired in public interest . We are also not inclined to<\/p>\n
interfere with the order dated 20.6.2005 (Annexure-1 to the writ<\/p>\n
petition) on the ground that on the same date another order was passed,
\n                                      5<\/span><\/p>\n
punishing him to be reverted to the original pay scale . Petitioner had<\/p>\n
received both the order but did not choose to challenge the order dated<\/p>\n
20.6.2005 by which he was reverted to the original pay scale in this writ<\/p>\n
petition. Even if the order dated 20.6.2005 withholding his one<\/p>\n
increment for a period of one year (Annexure-1 to the writ petition ) is<\/p>\n
set aside the decision of compulsory retirement will not be affected.<\/p>\n
       The writ petition lacks merit and the is dismissed.<\/p>\n
21.1.2010
\nD.K.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010 1 Court No.4 Writ Petition No. 499(S\/B) of 2006 Anand Kishore Jaiswal Petitioner Vs. The State of U.P. and others Opposite parties ———- Hon’ble Sunil Ambwani, J. Hon’ble Anil Kumar,J. Heard Sri Rajeev Singh, learned counsel 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":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-99049","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - 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\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1112,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - 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\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010"},"wordCount":1112,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010","name":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin ... on 21 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-10T21:25:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anand-kishore-jaiswal-vs-the-state-of-u-p-through-its-prin-on-21-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anand Kishore Jaiswal vs The State Of U.P.Through Its Prin … on 21 January, 2010"}]},{"@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\/99049","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=99049"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99049\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=99049"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=99049"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=99049"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}