{"id":103763,"date":"2011-09-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-09-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011"},"modified":"2018-01-04T22:12:13","modified_gmt":"2018-01-04T16:42:13","slug":"bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: V. M. Jhaveri,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n    \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nLPA\/426\/2000\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 426 of 2000\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6265 of 1999\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \n<a href=\"\/doc\/176426503\/\">HONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI<\/a>\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nBHANUMATI\nKRISHANKAT DAVE - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nAHMEDABAD\nMUNICIPAL CORPN &amp; 3 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nDIPAK R DAVE for\nAppellant(s) : 1, 1.2.1,1.2.2  \nMR RAJESH CHAUHAN FOR MR HS MUNSHAW\nfor Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. \nMRS VD NANAVATI for Respondent(s) :\n3, \nMR MITUL K SHELAT for Respondent(s) : 3, \nMR NJ SHAH, ASST\nGOVT. PLEADER for Respondent(s) :\n4, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n<a href=\"\/doc\/176426503\/\">HONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate<\/a>\n: 26\/09\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\npresent appeal arises from the judgement and order dated 30.06.2000<br \/>\nin Special Civil Application No. 6265 of 1999 wherein the judgement<br \/>\nand order dated 16.08.1999 passed by the Gujarat Affiliated Colleges<br \/>\nService Tribunal in Application No. 52 of 1999 was set aside by the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nappellant herein was appointed as a Professor in Pharmacology in the<br \/>\nyear 1972 in the college run by the opponent corporation.  It is the<br \/>\ncase of the appellant that as per the State Government as well as<br \/>\nGujarat University, the retirement age of the teaching staff is 62<br \/>\nyears and hence he should be allowed to continue in the services till<br \/>\nhe attains the age of 62.  The appellant therefore approached the<br \/>\nGujarat Affiliated Colleges Service Tribunal by way of Application<br \/>\nNo. 52 of 1999.  The Tribunal after hearing the parties, the Tribunal<br \/>\ndirected the respondent corporation to continue the appellant till<br \/>\nthe age of 62 years.  Being aggrieved by the said judgement, the<br \/>\nrespondent corporation preferred Special Civil Application No. 6265<br \/>\nof 1999 before this court.  The learned Single Judge vide order dated<br \/>\n30.06.2000 allowed the same and quashed and set aside the order dated<br \/>\n16.08.1999 passed by the Tribunal.  Hence the present appeal is<br \/>\nfiled.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the<br \/>\nparties and perused the papers on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Dave, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that in view of<br \/>\nthe language used in the resolution dated 27.07.1998-Annexure &#8216;F&#8217;<br \/>\nwherein clause (vi) reads that the age of superannuation of<br \/>\nuniversity and college teachers would be 62 years and thereafter no<br \/>\nextension in service should be given and that however it will be open<br \/>\nto university or college to re employ a superannuated teacher<br \/>\naccording to the existing guidelines framed by the UGC upto the age<br \/>\nof 65 years, the respondent<br \/>\ncorporation ought to have considered the superannuation age of its<br \/>\nemployees as 62 years as the subsequent resolution dated 07.09.1998-<br \/>\nAnnexure &#8216;G&#8217; had adopted the resolution dated 27.07.1998.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tWe<br \/>\nhave read the impugned judgement and order passed by the learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge. The learned Single Judge has in detail considered the<br \/>\nsubmissions of both the sides and has come to the conclusion that<br \/>\n&#8216;Medical Science &#8216; not being a professional course, no benefit<br \/>\nincluding that of the enhanced age of superannuation under the scheme<br \/>\nor Ordinance 172 can be conferred upon such teachers.  The learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge in relevant paragraphs has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>      \t&#8220;It<br \/>\n is  required   to   be   noticed   that   the recommendations  made<br \/>\nby  the UGC were in respect of the revision of pay of the teachers<br \/>\nand also  in  respect  of the  requisite  qualifications  and<br \/>\nincentives for career advancements, etc.  The recommendations made by<br \/>\n the  UGC were  accepted by the Government of India in its Ministry<br \/>\nof Human Resources Development [Education Department] and  the<br \/>\nacceptance was communicated  by  communication  dated      27th July,<br \/>\n 1998  referred  to  hereinabove.    The  said communication<br \/>\nevidences that the the Government of  India had  decided  to revise<br \/>\nthe pay scales of the teachers in the Central Universities and in the<br \/>\n Colleges  affiliated to the  Central Universities.  The revision of<br \/>\npay scales of teachers was made subject to various provisions of the<br \/>\nscheme of revision of pay scales,  as  contained  in  the  said<br \/>\nletter  and  the  regulations  to  be framed by the    U.G.C.  The<br \/>\nScheme of the revised  pay  scales  was  also sent to the Education<br \/>\nSecretaries of the States and Union Territories.   The  Central<br \/>\nGovernment  also assured the financial assistance to the State<br \/>\nGovernments who wish to adopt and implement the scheme of revision of<br \/>\npay scales, subject to the terms and  conditions  contained  therein.<br \/>\nParagraph   8  of  the  said  communication  specifically   excludes<br \/>\nthe Agricultural Universities and  Agricultural, Medical and<br \/>\nVeterinary Science Colleges.  The said scheme was  thus  made<br \/>\napplicable to the teachers other than the teachers  in  the<br \/>\nAgricultural  Universities   and   the Agricultural,  Medical  and<br \/>\nVeterinary Science Colleges.  Paragraph 4 thereof enjoins upon the<br \/>\nState Government  to implement  the  scheme  as  a  composite  scheme<br \/>\n without modification, except the date of implementation.   It  is<br \/>\nthe  said  scheme  which  has  been  adopted by the State Government<br \/>\nunder  its  Resolution  dated  7th  September,1998.   The  scheme<br \/>\nwhich  was  accepted  by the Central Government and for which  the<br \/>\nfinancial  assistance  was assured  was in respect of the teachers in<br \/>\nColleges other than  in  the  Agricultural   University   and   in<br \/>\nthe Agricultural,  Medical  and  Veterinary Science Colleges. In view<br \/>\nof paragraph 4 of the  communication  dated  27th July,  1998<br \/>\naddressed to the Education Secretaries of the State   Governments,<br \/>\nreferred   to   hereinabove,   the  Government  could not have<br \/>\nadopted the scheme of revision of pay scales beyond the scope<br \/>\ncircumscribed in the  said communication dated  27th  July,  1998.<br \/>\nThe Government Resolution  dated  7th  September,  1998,  therefore,<br \/>\nis required   to  be  read  in  light  of  the  instructions<br \/>\ncontained in the above referred communication dated  27th July, 1998.<br \/>\n The scope of the Government Resolution dated 7th  September, 1998,<br \/>\ntherefore, cannot be expanded so as to include the teachers in the<br \/>\nAgricultural  Universities  and  the  Agricultural,  Medical  and<br \/>\nVeterinary Science Colleges  who  are   specifically   excluded<br \/>\nfrom   the  applicability  of  the  scheme  adopted  by  the  Central<br \/>\nGovernment.  Similarly, the Vice  Chancellor  had  issued the<br \/>\nCircular  dated  2nd November, 1998, pursuant to the Government<br \/>\nResolution  dated  7th  September,  1998  and paragraph  15  of  the<br \/>\nOrdinance  172  has  been amended pursuant to the Circular dated 2nd<br \/>\nNovember, 1998  issued by the  Vice  Chancellor.    I am, therefore,<br \/>\nof the view   that not only the Resolution dated  7th  September,<br \/>\n1998 but  the above referred Circular dated 2nd November, 1998 and<br \/>\nthe Ordinance 172 (15) [as amended on 4th May,  2000] are  required<br \/>\nto  be  read  in  light  of the conditions prescribed in the above<br \/>\nreferred communication dated 27th July, 1998.  In my view, the<br \/>\nCentral  Government  had  no  intention  to  include  the<br \/>\nAgricultural Universities and Agricultural, Medical and Veterinary<br \/>\nScience Colleges  in the  aforesaid  scheme  nor  the same can be<br \/>\nsaid to have been applied by the State Government to the  teachers<br \/>\nin Agricultural  University  and  Agricultural,  Medical and<br \/>\nVeterinary Science  Colleges.    Besides,  the   reliance  placed on<br \/>\nOrdinance 172 (15) is wholly misconceived.  It   is required to be<br \/>\nnoted that the professional courses are specifically excluded from<br \/>\nthe purview of  Ordinance  172(15) of  the  University.    It  cannot<br \/>\nbe gainsaid that,`Medical Science is also  a  professional  course&#8217;.<br \/>\n  No benefit   including   that   of   the   enhanced  age of<br \/>\nsuperannuation under the said  scheme  or  Ordinance 172 can,<br \/>\ntherefore, be conferred upon such teachers.\n<\/p>\n<p>      \tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p> Munshaw has also submitted that the staff of the medical colleges is<br \/>\nunder the administrative  control of  the  Health  Department  of<br \/>\nthe  Government  and the instructions issued by the Education<br \/>\nDepartment  are  not applicable to the staff of such colleges.\n<\/p>\n<p>      \tThe<br \/>\n determination  of  the age of superannuation depends upon the<br \/>\navailability of the  qualified  persons, the  necessity  of<br \/>\nexperienced  persons and of providing employment  to  the  younger<br \/>\ngeneration,   technological development over  the  recent years, etc.<br \/>\n It is only the body of experts which can consider the  factors<br \/>\nrelevant for determining  the age of superannuation.  The Court of<br \/>\nLaw sans such expertise cannot and should  not  interfere in such<br \/>\nmatters.    In  the  present  case,  undoubtedly neither the UGC nor<br \/>\nany other body of experts  has  taken decision in this regard.<br \/>\nFurther, the Central Government also  has  expressly kept the medical<br \/>\ncolleges out of the purview of the scheme  of  the  revision  of  pay<br \/>\n scales  accepted by  it  on 27th July, 1998.  The University also<br \/>\nhas specifically excluded the professional  courses  from  the<br \/>\napplicability of its Ordinance 172 (15) as amended on  4th May,<br \/>\n2000.      The   claim   of  enhanced  age  of superannuation made by<br \/>\nthe teachers herein is, therefore, devoid of merits and is hereby<br \/>\nrejected.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tWe<br \/>\nare of the opinion that no illegality is committed by the learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge in passing the above order.  The service conditions of<br \/>\nteachers in the Medical Colleges shall not be governed by either the<br \/>\nGovernment Resolution dated 07.09.1998 or the Ordinance 172 (15); as<br \/>\namended pursuant to the aforesaid Resolution dated 07.09.1998.  We<br \/>\nare in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings<br \/>\narrived at by the learned Single Judge and therefore do not see any<br \/>\nreason for causing interference.  Appeal is devoid of any merits and<br \/>\nis therefore dismissed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(V.M.\n<\/p>\n<p>SAHAI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>(K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>JHAVERI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>Divya\/\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 Author: V. M. Jhaveri, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA\/426\/2000 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 426 of 2000 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6265 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. [&hellip;]<\/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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-103763","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1355,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\",\"name\":\"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011"},"wordCount":1355,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011","name":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-04T16:42:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhanumati-vs-ahmedabad-on-26-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhanumati vs Ahmedabad on 26 September, 2011"}]},{"@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\/103763","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=103763"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103763\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=103763"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=103763"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=103763"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}