{"id":126392,"date":"2010-07-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010"},"modified":"2017-12-04T20:10:52","modified_gmt":"2017-12-04T14:40:52","slug":"popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&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\/6259\/2010\t 1\/ 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. 6259 of 2010\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6260 of 2010\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6262 of 2010 \n\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8068 of 2010\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8071 of 2010\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nPOPAT\nFAGANA GAMAR &amp; 3 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nDY.EXECUTIVE\nENGINEER - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nAppearance\n: \nMR UT\nMISHRA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1 - 4. \nMR K.P. RAVAL AGP for Respondent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================================\n\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 16\/07\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>\tAll<br \/>\nthese petitions involve common questions on law and facts and<br \/>\ntherefore, they are disposed of by this common order.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThese<br \/>\ncross-petitions are directed against the common judgment and award<br \/>\npassed by the Labour Court, Himmatnagar in Reference (LCH)<br \/>\nNos.371\/1996, 377\/1996, 381\/1996 &amp; 391\/1996 dated 30.01.2010,<br \/>\nwhereby, the reference preferred by the petitioner-workmen were<br \/>\nallowed and the respondent-State has been directed to reinstate the<br \/>\nworkmen to their original post with continuity of service &amp; other<br \/>\nconsequential benefits but, without any back wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSpecial<br \/>\nCivil Application Nos.6259\/2010 to 6262\/2010 have been preferred by<br \/>\nthe workmen against the impugned award whereby, they were not granted<br \/>\nany back wages, whereas, Special Civil Application Nos.8068\/2010 to<br \/>\n8071\/2010 has been preferred by the State, whereby, they have been<br \/>\ndirected to reinstate the workmen to their original post with<br \/>\ncontinuity of service &amp; other consequential benefits.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nfacts in brief are that the petitioner-workmen were working as<br \/>\nRojamdar Labourers with the<br \/>\nrespondents. On the ground that their services were illegally<br \/>\nterminated by the respondent on 05.09.1991, they raised an industrial<br \/>\ndispute, which, ultimately, culminated into References before the<br \/>\nCourt below. The Labour Court, after considering the evidence on<br \/>\nrecord, partly allowed the References by passing the impugned award.<br \/>\nHence, these petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tHeard learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe respective parties and perused the documents on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThis<br \/>\nis a classic case where one can witness the wastage of public money<br \/>\nby the concerned Officers in the Government Department,<br \/>\nwho, on account of their callous attitude and utter disregard to the<br \/>\norders issued by the Court of law, have caused serious damage to the<br \/>\nPublic Exchequer. In the following paragraphs, this Court would<br \/>\nhighlight the instances or lapses on the part of the Officer<br \/>\nconcerned, which has resulted into serious damage to the Government.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tIn the proceedings before<br \/>\nthe Court below, the respondent-State had filed reply, which ran into<br \/>\nonly two pages. The averments made in the said reply are general in<br \/>\nnature and no specific details have been provided. Apart from that<br \/>\nvide order passed below Ex.37, the Court below had directed the<br \/>\nrespondent-State to produce certain documents on record. It was<br \/>\nfurther directed that if the same were not available, then an<br \/>\nAffidavit in that respect, sworn by the concerned Officer, be<br \/>\nproduced on record. However, in spite of the aforesaid order below<br \/>\nEx.37, neither any document\/s nor any affidavit as aforesaid, was<br \/>\nproduced on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIt is a pitiable<br \/>\nsituation and a sorry state of affairs in the Government Departments<br \/>\nwhen it comes to dealing with matters pending before Courts of law.<br \/>\nTime is ripe that the Government frames strict guidelines so as to<br \/>\nfix responsibility on the official concerned and to ensure that the<br \/>\nofficials act promptly and respect the orders passed by Courts of<br \/>\nLaw.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tSo<br \/>\nfar as the merits of the case are concerned, there is evidence<br \/>\non record to show that during the period 1989 to 1991, the<br \/>\npetitioner-workmen had worked for more than 240 days every year. It<br \/>\nalso transpires that before terminating the services of the<br \/>\npetitioner-workmen on 05.09.1991, the respondent-State had not issued<br \/>\nany notice or paid any notice pay or retrenchment compensation to the<br \/>\nworkmen and had thereby, violated the mandatory provisions of Section<br \/>\n25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Thus, the impugned action<br \/>\nof the respondent was found to be illegal and contrary to the settled<br \/>\nprinciples of law.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.<br \/>\n\tOn the question of back wages, it appears from the record that the<br \/>\nworkmen were gainfully employed during the interregnum period.<br \/>\nMoreover, the respondent is a Government Department. In the case of<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/800069\/\">Ram Ashrey Singh v. Ram Bux Singh,<\/a> (2003) II<br \/>\nL.L.J. Pg.176, the Apex Court has held that a workman has no<br \/>\nautomatic entitlement to back wages since it is discretionary and has<br \/>\nto be dealt with in accordance with the facts and circumstances of<br \/>\neach case. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1628125\/\">General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh,<br \/>\nJ.T.<\/a> 2005 (6) S.C.,pg. 137, [2005 \/(5) S.C.C.,pg.591],<br \/>\nwherein, it has been held that an order for payment of back wages<br \/>\nshould not be passed in a mechanical manner but, a host of factors<br \/>\nare to be taken into consideration before passing any such order.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.<br \/>\nIt would also be relevant to refer to a decision of the Apex Court in<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/309814\/\">A.P. State Road Transport &amp; Ors., v. Abdul<br \/>\nKareem,<\/a> (2005) 6 S.C.C. pg.36, wherein it has been held that<br \/>\na workman is not entitled to any consequential relief on<br \/>\nreinstatement as a matter of course unless specifically directed by<br \/>\nforum granting reinstatement. Looking to the facts of the case and<br \/>\nthe principle laid down by the Apex Court in the above decisions, I<br \/>\nam of the opinion that the petitioner-workmen cannot be said to be<br \/>\nentitled for any back wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIn view of the above<br \/>\ndiscussion, I am of the opinion that the Court below was completely<br \/>\njustified in passing the impugned award. I am in complete agreement<br \/>\nwith the reasonings given by and the findings arrived at by the Court<br \/>\nbelow and hence, find no reasons to interfere with the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tFor the foregoing<br \/>\nreasons, all the petitions are rejected. It is, however, clarified<br \/>\nthat the petitioner-workmen shall be granted the benefit of<br \/>\ncontinuity of service but, the interregnum period shall be treated as<br \/>\ndias-non. To avoid further payment of idle wages to the<br \/>\npetitioner-workmen from 01.02.2010, the respondent is directed to<br \/>\nreinstate the petitioner-workmen, as per the directions issued in the<br \/>\nimpugned award, on or before 02.08.2010. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>[K.\n<\/p>\n<p>S. JHAVERI, J.]\t\t<\/p>\n<p>Pravin\/*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/6259\/2010 1\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6259 of 2010 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6260 of 2010 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6262 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-126392","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>Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - 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\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-04T14:40:52+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\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T14:40:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":942,\"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\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T14:40:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 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":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - 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\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-04T14:40:52+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\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T14:40:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010"},"wordCount":942,"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\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010","name":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T14:40:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/popat-vs-dy-executive-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Popat vs Dy.Executive on 16 July, 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\/126392","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=126392"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126392\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=126392"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=126392"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=126392"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}