{"id":117278,"date":"2011-02-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011"},"modified":"2018-07-05T12:24:22","modified_gmt":"2018-07-05T06:54:22","slug":"ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/15722\/2010\t 4\/ 5\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 15722 of 2010\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 15724 of 2010\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 16335 of 2010\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nAHMEDABAD\nMUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE THROUGH - Petitioner\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSAFIMIYAN\nHUSENMIYAN SAIYAD - Respondent\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nHS MUNSHAW for\nPetitioner \nMR YOGEN N PANDYA for\nRespondent \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\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 03\/02\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nCOMMON\nORAL ORDER<\/pre>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthis group of petitions, the petitioner is the same and issue is<br \/>\n\tidentical, wherein, the concerned Industrial Court has allowed the<br \/>\n\tMisc. Application under Rule 26A of the Industrial Disputes<br \/>\n\t(Gujarat) Rules on the ground that Industrial Court ought not to<br \/>\n\thave condoned the delay, as the facts are so glaring which would<br \/>\n\tshock the conscious of any Court. The subject matter of the<br \/>\n\tchallenge is same and petitioner is same and therefore, all these<br \/>\n\tmatters were heard together and are being disposed of by this common<br \/>\n\torder.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shri<br \/>\n\tMunshaw, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted<br \/>\n\tthat in all this three cases, the workmen were issued and facing<br \/>\n\tserious charges of habitual absentism and on account of such a<br \/>\n\tchargesheet, inquiry was required to be conducted, which was<br \/>\n\tconducted and as a result thereof, the appropriate punishment orders<br \/>\n\tof dismissal were passed. These orders were required to be governed<br \/>\n\tby the provisions of Section 33(2)(B) and hence, the appropriate<br \/>\n\tapproval applications in each of the cases were made. The approval<br \/>\n\tapplications were made in the year 2003 and as it is seen from the<br \/>\n\torders made on the approval application, the respective workman did<br \/>\n\tnot remain present nor did they bother to file their written<br \/>\n\tstatement. Hence, ultimately, the Court after recording its<br \/>\n\tfindings, came to the conclusion that the approval, as sought for is<br \/>\n\trequired to be allowed and accorded approval in all the approval<br \/>\n\tapplications vide its order in the year 2006. These orders were<br \/>\n\tpassed ex-parte in the year 2006. No application under Rule 26 of<br \/>\n\tthe Rules came to be made for quite sometime and ultimately, the<br \/>\n\tworkmen woke up from slumber and filed Restoration Application with<br \/>\n\tdelay condonation application in the year 2009. Thus, there is<br \/>\n\tinordinate delay in preferring the applications. The workmen did not<br \/>\n\tspecifically mentioned anywhere in the application as to what<br \/>\n\tprevented them from approaching the Court with reply in the main<br \/>\n\tapproval application nor did workmen mentioned as to what prevented<br \/>\n\tthem from filing restoration application in time. The Industrial<br \/>\n\tCourt has on broad principles of liberal approach to the delay<br \/>\n\tcondonation application, has allowed the applications for<br \/>\n\tcondonation of delay and thus, now, the restoration applications are<br \/>\n\tto be heard on merits. At this stage, this Court is approached under<br \/>\n\tArticles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shri<br \/>\n\tMunshaw, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted<br \/>\n\tthat the condonation of delay is without taking into consideration<br \/>\n\tthe relevant factors like the testing of veracity of the workmen,<br \/>\n\trecording findings with regard to workmen&#8217;s say, which preventing<br \/>\n\tworkmen from appearing before the Court when the approval<br \/>\n\tapplication was pending and cause preventing workmen from filing<br \/>\n\trestoration application. He submitted that restoration application,<br \/>\n\tif allowed, would cause tremendous hardship and result into undue<br \/>\n\tadvantage to the workmen as the question of monetary benefits in the<br \/>\n\tintervening period may crop up and therefore, he submits that delay<br \/>\n\tcondonation applications were not required to be allowed. He in the<br \/>\n\talternative submitted that in case, if the Court is not inclined to<br \/>\n\taccept this submission as there would be a chance and opportunity to<br \/>\n\tthe corporation petitioner to make appropriate submission in respect<br \/>\n\tof the question of back wages, arising at the relevant time, then,<br \/>\n\tat least, the workmen who be not permitted to take advantage of<br \/>\n\ttheir own delay, which otherwise may amount to putting premium upon<br \/>\n\ttheir position, which has occurred on account of their own<br \/>\n\tirrelevant behaviour. He submitted that the Court may order that the<br \/>\n\tworkmen may not be entitled to the back wages for the concerned<br \/>\n\tperiod.\n<\/p>\n<p>At<br \/>\n\tthis stage, Shri Pandya, learned advocate appearing for the<br \/>\n\trespondent workman in each matter, submitted that he has<br \/>\n\tinstructions to submit on behalf of workmen that workmen would file<br \/>\n\tan undertaking before the Court where the Restoration Application is<br \/>\n\tbeing argued that the workmen even if the Restoration Application is<br \/>\n\tallowed, would not claim back wages for the period from the date of<br \/>\n\taward in the approval application till the date of filing of<br \/>\n\trespective applications for restoration and delay condonation. A<br \/>\n\tcopy of such undertaking can also be given to the other side as well<br \/>\n\tas to file in the proceedings of this petitions and court may<br \/>\n\tdispose of the matter, as the other side is otherwise have a liberty<br \/>\n\tto argue and make submission on back wages or further binding the<br \/>\n\tworkmen in restoration application hearing itself.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tview of this submission made by Shri Pandya, learned advocate Shri<br \/>\n\tMunshaw for the petitioner submits that he does not press these<br \/>\n\tpetitions as the workmen themselves have given up their claim for<br \/>\n\twages under any circumstances for the period i.e. the date on which,<br \/>\n\tthe approval application was allowed till restoration application<br \/>\n\twas filed. However, both the advocates requested that the Court may<br \/>\n\tpass appropriate direction to the concerned Tribunal to dispose of<br \/>\n\tthe main matters i.e. Restoration Applications itself as<br \/>\n\texpeditiously as possible.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tview of this submission and in view of the fact that Shri Munshaw,<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate does not press these petitions, it would be<br \/>\n\tappropriate to issue direction to the concerned Industrial Tribunal<br \/>\n\tto dispose of the Restoration Applications on merits on or before<br \/>\n\t30.04.2011. With this observation, all the petitions are disposed<br \/>\n\tof. Notice discharged. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Registry<br \/>\n\tis directed to keep of this matter in each matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>pallav<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011 Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/15722\/2010 4\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15722 of 2010 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15724 of 2010 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16335 of 2010 ========================================================= [&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-117278","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>Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 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\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-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=\"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":917,\"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\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\",\"name\":\"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 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":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 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\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011"},"wordCount":917,"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\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011","name":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-05T06:54:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ahmedabad-vs-safimiyan-on-3-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ahmedabad vs Safimiyan on 3 February, 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\/117278","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=117278"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117278\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117278"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=117278"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=117278"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}