{"id":111836,"date":"1992-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1992-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992"},"modified":"2016-05-12T06:33:04","modified_gmt":"2016-05-12T01:03:04","slug":"governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","title":{"rendered":"Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992<\/div>\n
Bench: [S. Ranganathan Singh, Jj.]<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nGOVERNING COUNCIL  OF KIDWAI MEMORIAL INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY,\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDR PANDURANG GODWALKAR AND ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/10\/1992\n\nBENCH:\n[S. RANGANATHAN AND N.P SINGH, JJ.]\n\n\n\n\nACT:\nCivil Services :\nTermination  of\t  service  during  probation  period-Overall\nperformance-Consideration of-Termination  whether amounts to\npunishment-Finding out\tthe real  nature of order-Tearing of\nthe   veil-    Applicability   of-Preliminary\tinquiry\t  or\nexamination  of\t  allegation-Whether   vitiates\t  order\t  of\ntermination of service.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe respondent\twas appointed  as  a  Lecturer\tin  the\nappellant-Institute and\t was put  on probation for one year.\nDuring the  probation period  his services  were terminated.\nThe respondent\tchallenged the same before the High Court by\nway of\ta Writ\tPetition contending  that actually  order of\ndismissal has  been passed  in\tthe  garb  of  an  order  of\ntermination; and  that the Director of the institute instead\nof initiating a departmental proceeding on the basis of some\ncharges levelled  against him,\tplaced the matter before the\ngoverning council  of the  Institute\ttermination  of\t his\nservices.\nThe High  Court gave its finding that since the service\nof  the\t petitioner  had  been\tterminated  because  of\t the\ncomplaints made\t against him,  it  really  amounted  to\t his\nremoval for  alleged misconduct\t and so the institute should\nhave initiated\ta departmental proceeding and only after due\nenquiry any action should have been taken.\nBeing  aggrieved   by  the   High  Courts   order,  the\nappellant-Institute has preferred the present appeal.\nAllowing the appeal, this Court,\nHELD: 1.1. When an appointment is made on probation, it\npre-supposes that  the conduct, performance, ability and the\ncapacity of  the employee  concerned have  to be watched and\nexamined during\t the  period  of  probation.  He  is  to  be\nconfirmed after\t the  expiry  of  probation  only  when\t his\nservice during\tthe period  of\tprobation  is  found  to  be\nsatisfactory and  he is\t considered suitable  for  the\tpost\nagainst which  he  has\tbeen  appointed.  The  principle  of\ntearing of  the veil  for finding out the real nature of the\norder shall  be applicable only in a case where the Court is\nsatisfied that there is a direct nexus between the charge so\nlevelled and  the action  taken. If the decision is taken to\nterminate the  service of  an employee\tduring the period of\nprobation,  after  taking  into\t consideration\tthe  overall\nperformance and\t some action or inaction on the part of such\nemployee then  it cannot  be said  that it  amounts  to\t his\nremoval from service as punishment. The appointing authority\nat the stage of confirmation or while examining the question\nas to  whether the  service of\tsuch employee  be terminated\nduring the  continuance\t of  the  period  of  probation,  is\nentitled to  look into any complaint made in respect of such\nemployee while\tdischarging his duties for purpose of making\nassessment of  the performance\tof such\t employee. [254-E-H;\n255-A]\n1.2.  Even  if\tsuch  employee\twhile  questioning  the\nvalidity of  an order  of termination  simpliciter brings on\nthe record  that some  preliminary inquiry or examination of\nsome allegations  had been  made, that\twill not vitiate the\norder of termination. [255-B]\nOil and\t Natural Gas Commission v. Dr. Mohd S. Iskender\nAli<\/a> [1980]  3 SCR  603; Ravindra  Kumar Misra  v. U.P. State\nHandloom Corpn.\t Ltd.,<\/a> [1987] suppl. SCC 739; State of Uttar\nPradesh v.  Kaushal Kishore  Shukla,<\/a> [1991]  1 SCC  691\t and\nTriveni Shankar\t Saxena v. State of U.P., J.T.<\/a> 1992 (1) S.C.\n37, relied on.\nAnoop Jaiswal v. Government of India,<\/a> [1984] 2 SCR 453.\ndistinguished.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No 3244 of
\n1988.\n<\/p>\n
     From the  Judgement and  Order dated  8.7.1988  of\t the
\nKarnataka High Court in W.A. No.560 of 1983.\n<\/p>\n
     K.N. Bhat\tS.K. Kulkarni  and Ms.\tKiran Suri  for\t the
\nAppellant
\n     S.N  Bhat\tM.Veerappa  and\t K.H  Nobin  Singh  for\t the
\nrespondents.\n<\/p>\n
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n     N.P. SINGH,  J. This  appeal has  been filed against an
\norder passed  by the High Court, on a writ application filed
\nby the\tpetitioner-respondent (hereinafter  referred  to  as
\n“the respondent”)  quashing the\t order of termination of the
\nservice of the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
     The respondent  was appointed as a Lecturer in Surgical
\nOncology on  3rd July, 1981. He was to be on probation for a
\nperiod of  one year  from the  date of his appointment which
\nperiod could  have been\t extended at  the discretion  of the
\ncompetent authority. One of the conditions provided is as
\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n
     “Failure to  complete the period of
\n     probation to  the\tsatisfaction  of
\n     the competent authority will render
\n     you liable\t to be\tdischarged  from
\n     service.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Before the\t expiry of  one year,  the impugned order of
\ntermination was issued on 30th January, 1982 saying:\n<\/p>\n
     “In accordance with the decision of
\n     the  Governing   Council\tat   its
\n     meeting held  on 28th January, 1982
\n     the  services   of\t Dr.   Pandurang
\n     Godwalkar,\t Lecturer   in\tSurgical
\n     Oncology  (on   probation),  Kidwai
\n     Memorial  Institute   of  Oncology,
\n     Bangalore\t are   terminated   with
\n     effect from  the  afternoon  of  30
\n     January, 1982, as per Rule 4 of the
\n     Conditions\t  of\tService\t   Rules
\n     (Annexure –  2 Chapter  I)\t of  the
\n     Institute.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     He is  paid one  month’s salary  in
\n     lieu of one month’s notice required
\n     as per rules.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Although  the   order  under  challenge  was  order  of
\ntermination simpliciter, the validity thereof was questioned
\nby the\trespondent on  the ground that an order of dismissal
\nhad been  passed in  the garb  of an  order of\ttermination.
\nAccording to  the respondent,  some complaints had been made
\nagainst him  to the Director of the Institute who instead of
\ninitiating a  departmental proceeding  on basis\t of  charges
\nlevelled against  the respondent,  put up  the matter before
\nthe Governing  Council of  the Institute  for termination of
\nthe  service   of  the\t respondent  during  the  period  of
\nprobation.\n<\/p>\n
     The learned  Judge in  view of  the assertions  made on
\nbehalf of  the respondent  directed the institute to produce
\nthe original  records including certain documents and papers
\nwhich had  been marked as confidential. From the note of the
\nDirector it  appeared  that  complaints\t had  been  made  in
\nrespect of  performance of  the duties by the respondent. In
\nthat note  it was  also mentioned  that the  respondent\t was
\nunsympathetic towards  the patients.  It had also brought to
\nthe notice  of the Governing Council that the respondent had
\nattempted to  obtain the signatures. of some of the patients
\non the\tpetitions stating  that he was a good doctor. On one
\noccasion it  was reported that the respondent had taken away
\na girl\ton his\tscooter and  brought her  back late  in\t the
\nnight. The  said girl  was an  attendant to a patient in the
\nhospital. The  learned Judge  came to the conclusion that as
\nthe service of the petitioner had been terminated because of
\nthe complaints\tmade against  him it  really amounted to his
\nremoval for  the misconduct  alleged  in  the  note  of\t the
\nDirector. According  to\t the  learned  Judge  the  Institute
\nshould have  initiated a  departmental proceeding in respect
\nof the alleged charges and only after due enquiry any action
\nshould have been taken.\n<\/p>\n
     There is  no dispute that the service of the respondent
\nhad been  terminated during  the  period  of  probation\t The
\nappointment of\tthe respondent\twas with  a clear  condition
\nthat failure  to complete  the period  of probation  to\t the
\nsatisfaction of\t the competent\tauthority shall\t render\t him
\nliable to  be discharged  from the service. Relevant part of
\nRule 4 of the Conditions of Service Rules is as follows :\n<\/p>\n
     “4. TERMlNATION :-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     1.\t All   appointments   shall   be
\n     terminable on a notice in\t writing
\n     either by\tthe appointing authority
\n     or the  employee  without assigning
\n     any reason as set below :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     a) During the period ..one month of
\n     probation.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     b) After completion of the period 1
\n     of probation…… months.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     c) The  notice referred  to in rule
\n     (1) above shall not be necessary if
\n     in lieu  thereof an amount equal to
\n     the  pay\tand  allowance\tfor  the
\n     period of notice is paid.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
…………………..”\n<\/p>\n
     Generally in connection with an order of termination, a
\nquestion is raised before the court as to what is the motive
\nbehind the  termination\t of  the  service  of  the  employee
\nconcerned –  whether the  reason mentioned  in the  order of
\ntermination has\t to be\taccepted on  its face  value or\t the
\nbackground in  which such  order of  termination simpliciter
\nhas been passed should be examined to find out as to whether
\nan officer  on probation  or holding a temporary appointment
\nhas been,  in  fact,  dismissed\t from  the  service  without
\ninitiating any\tdepartmental enquiry.  If an employee who is
\non probation or holding an appointment on temporary basis is
\nremoved\t from  the  service  with  stigma  because  of\tsome
\nspecific charge,  then a  plea cannot  be taken\t that as his
\nservice was  temporary or  his appointment was on probation,
\nthere was no requirement of holding any enquiry, affording
\nsuch an\t employee an  opportunity to  show that\t the  charge
\nlevelled against him is either not true or it is without any
\nbasis. But whenever the service of an employee is terminated
\nduring the  period of probation or while his  appointment is
\non temporary basis, by an order of termination simpliciter
\nalter some  preliminary enquiry\t it cannot  he held  that as
\nsome enquiry  had been\tmade against him before the issuance
\nof order  of the  termination  it  really  amounted  to\t his
\nremoval from service on a charge as such penal in nature
\n     When  an\tappointment  is\t  made\ton   probation,\t  it
\npresupposes that  the conduct,\tperformance, ability and the
\ncapacity of  the employee  concerned have  to be watched and
\nexamined during\t the  period  of  probation.  He  is  to  be
\nconfirmed after\t the  expiry  of  probation  only  when\t his
\nservice during\tthe period  of\tprobation  is  found  to  be
\nsatisfactory and  he is\t considered suitable  for  the\tpost
\nagainst which  he  has\tbeen  appointed.  The  principle  of
\ntearing of  the veil  for finding out the real nature of the
\norder shall  be applicable only in a case where the Court is
\nsatisfied that there is a direct nexus between the charge so
\nlevelled and  the action taken. If the decision is taken, to
\nterminate the  service of  an employee\tduring the period of
\nprobation,  after  taking  into\t consideration\tthe  overall
\nperformance and\t some action or inaction on the part of such
\nemployee then  it cannot  be said  that it  amounts  to\t his
\nremoval from service as punishment. It need not be said that
\nthe appointing\tauthority at  the stage\t of confirmation  or
\nwhile examining\t the question  as to  whether the service of
\nsuch employee  be terminated  during the  continuance of the
\nperiod of  probation is entitled  to look into any complaint
\nmade in\t respect of  such  employee  while  discharging\t his
\nduties for  purpose of\tmaking assessment of the performance
\nof such employee.\n<\/p>\n
     Even it such employee while questioning the validity of
\nan order  of termination  simpliciter brings  on the  record
\nthat  some   preliminary  enquiry  or  examination  of\tsome
\nallegations had been made that will not vitiate the order of
\ntermination. Reference in this connection may be made to the
\ncase of\t Oil and  Natural Gas  Commission v.  Dr.  Mohd.  S.
\nIskender Ali,<\/a> [1980] 3 SCR 603 where it was pointed out that
\na  temporary  employee\tis  appointed  on  probation  for  a
\nparticular period  only in order to test whether his conduct
\nis good\t and satisfactory  so that  he may be retained” . It
\nwas  also   said  that\t even\tif   misconduct\t  negligence
\ninefficiency may  be the  motive or  the influencing  factor
\nwhich induced  the employer  to terminate the service of the
\nemployee which\tsuch employe  admittedly had under the terms
\nof the\tappointment such  termination cannot  be held  to be
\npenalty or  punishment. Same  view has\tbeen  reiterated  in
\nconnection with\t appointment on temporary or ad hoc basis in
\nthe cases  of Ravindra\tKumar Misra  v. U.P.  State Handloom
\nCorpn. Ltd,<\/a> [1987] Suppl. SCC 739; State of Uttar Pradesh v.
\nKaushal Kishore Shukla,<\/a> [1991] 1 SCC 691 and Triveni Shankar
\nSaxena v. State of U.P., Judgements Today<\/a> (1992) 1 S.C. 37.\n<\/p>\n
     On behalf\tof the respondent reliance was placed on the
\ncase of\t Anoop Jaiswal\tv. Government of India,<\/a> [1984] 2 SCR\n<\/p>\n
453. In\t that case  the service\t of the\t appellant had\tbeen
\nterminated during  the period of probation. On the materials
\non record  it was  held by  this Court\tthat  the  order  of
\ntermination really  amounted to\t punishment because the real
\nfoundation of  the action  against the appellant was the act
\nof misconduct on June 22, 1981. The aforesaid judgment is of
\nno help\t to who\t respondent because  in that  case  a  clear
\nfinding was  recorded by  this Court that the service of the
\nappellant  had\tbeen  terminated  because  of  a  particular
\nmisconduct alleged against him which had never been enquired
\ninto. So far the facts of the present case are concerned the
\nGoverning Council  examined the different reports in respect
\nof  the\t respondent  during  the  period  of  probation\t and
\nconsidered the\tquestion as  to whether he should be allowed
\nto continue  in the  service of\t the Institute. The decision
\nappears to  have been  taken by the Governing Council on the
\ntotal and  overall assessment  of  the\tperformance  of\t the
\nrespondent, in terms of the condition of the appointment and
\nRule aforesaid.\n<\/p>\n
     Accordingly the  appeal is\t allowed and the judgment of
\nthe High  Court is  set aside. However, in the circumstances
\nof the case, there will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
G.N\t\t\t\t\tAppeal allowed.\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 Bench: [S. Ranganathan Singh, Jj.] PETITIONER: GOVERNING COUNCIL OF KIDWAI MEMORIAL INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY, Vs. RESPONDENT: DR PANDURANG GODWALKAR AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/10\/1992 BENCH: [S. RANGANATHAN AND N.P SINGH, JJ.] ACT: Civil Services : Termination […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-111836","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nGoverning Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - 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\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Governing Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\" \/>\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=\"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-12T01:03:04+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992\",\"datePublished\":\"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-12T01:03:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\"},\"wordCount\":1640,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\",\"name\":\"Governing Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-12T01:03:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992\"}]},{\"@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":"Governing Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - 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\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Governing Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-12T01:03:04+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992","datePublished":"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-12T01:03:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992"},"wordCount":1640,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992","name":"Governing Council Of Kidwai ... vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1992-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-12T01:03:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/governing-council-of-kidwai-vs-dr-pandurang-godwalkar-and-anr-on-23-october-1992#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Governing Council Of Kidwai … vs Dr Pandurang Godwalkar And Anr on 23 October, 1992"}]},{"@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\/111836","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=111836"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/111836\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=111836"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=111836"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=111836"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}