{"id":131136,"date":"2011-02-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011"},"modified":"2019-02-10T23:51:19","modified_gmt":"2019-02-10T18:21:19","slug":"special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011<\/div>\n
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n\n\n\n     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 10869 of 2004\n\n\n\n\n     For Approval and Signature:\n\n\n\n      HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Sd\/-\n                    and\n      HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Sd\/-\n\n\n     ============================================================\n<\/pre>\n
    1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed      : NO
\n       to see the judgements?\n<\/p>\n
    2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?                  : YES<\/p>\n
    3. Whether Their Lordships     wish to see the fair copy   : NO
\n       of the judgement?\n<\/p>\n
    4. Whether this case involves a substantial question       : NO
\n       of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
\n       of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?\n<\/p>\n
    5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned       : NO
\n       Magistrate\/Magistrates,Judge\/Judges,Tribunal\/Tribunals?\n<\/p>\n
     ————————————————————–
\n     YEAST ALCO ENZYMES LTD.\n<\/p>\n
Versus
\n     UNION OF INDIA\n<\/p>\n
     ————————————————————–
\n     Appearance:\n<\/p>\n
     1. Special Civil Application No. 10869 of 2004
\n          MR BB NAIK for Petitioner No. 1<\/span>
\n          MR JITENDRA MALKAN for Respondent No. 1-3<\/p>\n
     ————————————————————–\n<\/p>\n
              CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
\n                                 and
\n                      HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI<\/p>\n
     Date of decision: 11\/03\/2005<\/p>\n
ORAL JUDGEMENT
\n               (Per : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA)<\/p>\n
1This petition    under   Article   226    of  the
\nConstitution of India is filed challenging order dated
\n26th November, 1998 passed by the Assistant Commissioner
\nof Central Excise, Bhavnagar – respondent No.3, order
\ndated 27th December, 2000 passed by the Commissioner
\n(Appeals) and order dated 8th January,2004 passed by the
\nCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.   The
\nfollowing substantial reliefs are prayed :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 “14.In the premises aforesaid, the petitioner
\n        prays as under :\n<\/p>\n
(A) Your   Lordships may be pleased to admit
\n                 the present petition;\n<\/p>\n
 (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a
\n                writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature
\n                of mandamus or a writ in the nature of
\n                mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
\n                order, direction or declaration declaring
\n                that Rule 57G(5) of the Central Excise
\n                Rules,    1944    are    ultravires   the
\n                Constitution of India;\n<\/p>\n
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a
\n                writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature
\n                of mandamus or any other appropriate
\n                writ, order or direction quashing and
\n                setting aside the order dated 26.11.1998
\n                passed by the Assistant Commissioner of
\n                Central Excise, Bhavnagar,    respondent
\n                No.3 (Annexure “E”), the order dated
\n                27.12.2000 passed by the Commissioner
\n                (Appeals) (Annexure “F”), and the order
\n                dated 8.1.2004 passed by the Customs,
\n                Excise   &   Gold   (Control)  Appellate
\n                Tribunal, (Annexure “G”);\n<\/p>\n
 (D) Pending the hearing and final disposal of
\n                the petition, this Honourable Court may
\n                be   pleased to stay and suspend the
\n                operation, implementation, execution and
\n                enforcement of the order dated 26.11.1998
\n                passed by the Assistant Commissioner of
\n                Central Excise, Bhavnagar,     respondent
\n                No.3 (Annexure “E”), the order dated
\n                27.12.2000 passed by the Commissioner
\n                (Appeals) (Annexure “F”) and the order
\n                dated 8.1.2004 passed by the Customs,
\n                 Excise   &   Gold   (Control)   Appellate
\n                Tribunal, (Annexure “G”)”;\n<\/p>\n
2The petitioner, a limited company is engaged in
\nmanufacturing of excisable goods falling under Chapter
\nHeading No.2204.00 and 3823.00 to the Schedule of the
\nCentral Excise   Tariff   Act,1985.      The   petitioner
\nmanufactures Ethyl Alcohol (denatured) and Ethyl Alcohol
\n(not-denatured), commonly known as “Rectified Spirit”.
\nThat Ethyl Alcohol (not-denatured) is chargeable to ‘nil’
\nrate of excise duty while Ethyl Alcohol (denatured)
\nattracts duty at the prevailing tariff rates.         The
\npetitioner exports Ethyl Alcohol (not-denatured). It is
\nthe case of the petitioner that it is entitled to Modvat
\nCredit under the Central Excise Rules,1944 (the Rules).\n<\/p>\n
3On 3rd February,1997 the petitioner informed the
\nRange Superintendent of Central Excise, Sihor , having
\njurisdicition over the petitioner, that the petitioner
\nshall be maintaining separate account and inventory for
\nmanufacture and sale of Ethyl Alcohol (not-denatured)
\nmeant only for export sale and shall not avail of modvat
\ncredit benefit on molasses, which is used as inputs in
\nthe manufacturing process.     It appears that on 31st
\nMarch,1997 3,10,498 litres of finished products meant for
\nexport were in stock. According to the petitioner out of
\nthe aforesaid goods it was constrained to sell 1,10,498
\nlitres in the local market as special denatured spirit
\nand   the   petitioner paid excise duty amounting to
\nRs.2,59,641\/-. On 14th June,1997 the petitioner wrote to
\nthe Range Superintendent intimating that it would like to
\navail of modvat credit on 482 MTs of molasses, worked out
\non pro-rata basis having been consumed in manufacture of
\n1,10,498 litres of Ethyl Alcohol (not-denatured) sold in
\nthe local market. This quantity of 482 MTs of molasses
\nhad   borne   duty   to    the extent of Rs.2,41,365\/-.
\nThereafter the aforesaid intimation was followed up by
\nletter dated 12th December,1997 and on 13th December,1997
\nthe petitioner took modvat credit by making entry in RG23
\nPart-II to the extent of Rs.2,41,365\/-.\n<\/p>\n
4On 1st July,1998 a show cause notice came to be
\nissued to the petitioner to explain as to why the modvat
\ncredit of Rs.2,41,365\/- should not be disallowed as the
\nsame was in contravention of Rule 57G and 57CC of the
\nRules.   Ultimately, after considering the explanation
\ntendered by the petitioner, on       26th   November,1998
\nrespondent   No.3   passed   an order-in-original after
\nadjudication disallowing modvat credit and also imposing
\npenalty of Rs.25,000\/- under Rule 173Q(1) of the Rules.
\n The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner
\n(Appeals) which came to be dismissed by order dated 27th
\nDecember,2000. The Second Appeal moved by the petitioner
\nbefore the Tribunal also came to be dismissed by order
\ndated 8th January,2004.     It is in the backdrop of the
\naforesaid facts that the present petition has been moved.\n<\/p>\n
5Mr.B.B.Nayak,   learned   Advocate appearing on
\nbehalf of the petitioner has principally challenged the
\naction of the respondent authorities on the ground that
\nsub-rule(5) of Rule 57G of the Rules is ultravires the
\nprovision i.e.    Rule 57G of the Rules (though in the
\nprayer it is stated to be ultravires the Constitution of
\nIndia).   It was submitted by Mr.Nayak that time limit of
\nsix months imposed by sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G of the
\nRules is arbitrary and has no rational nexus with the
\nobject sought to be achieved by Rule 57G of the Rules.
\nThat the said sub-rule stipulates that a manufacturer is
\nnot entitled to take credit after six months of the date
\nof issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3), but
\naccording to Mr.Nayak this limitation of period of six
\nmonths cannot be applied in all cases and in all
\ncircumstances.   Elaborating   on   the   submission   he
\ncontended that in a given case the manufacturer may be
\nplaced in a situation whereunder due to circumstances
\nbeyond the control of the manufacturer he cannot avail of
\nthe credit within a period of six months . Hence, either
\nthe said sub-rule providing for a period of six months
\nshould be struck down or should be read down by reading
\npower to condone the delay as being available to the
\nrevenue authorities.\n<\/p>\n
Alternatively it was pleaded that declaration
\nhaving been filed on 14th June,1997 and the petitioner
\nhaving availed of credit on 13th December,1997 it was
\nrequired to be held that the petitioner had complied with
\nthe statutory condition of availing of credit within a
\nperiod of six months.\n<\/p>\n
He, therefore, urged that in a case like the
\npresent one where the petitioner was forced to sell a
\npart of the manufactured product in the local market due
\nto non availability of the export market should not
\nresult in a situation whereby the petitioner is visited
\nwith penalty.   In the circumstances, it was pleaded that
\nsub-rule(5) of Rule 57G of the Rules be held to be
\nultravires and be declared to be so, and consequently
\nquash the impugned orders.\n<\/p>\n
6As already noticed respondent No.3 had passed an
\norder-in-original on 26th November,1998; the Commissioner
\n (Appeals) had passed the order on 27th December,2000 and
\nthe Tribunal passed the order on 8th January,2004. The
\npetition has been presented only on 27th August,2004.
\nTherefore,   it is apparent that the petitioner had
\nchallenged the order-in-original by exercising its right
\nof appeal under the statute and having failed in the
\nsuccessive appeals, the challenge as to vires of the rule
\nhas been raised.     This conduct of     the   petitioner
\nindicates that the challenge is an afterthought. Be that
\nas it may. Having heard the learned Counsel the petition
\nis rejected on merits for the following reasons.\n<\/p>\n
7It is an accepted position that        prior   to
\ninsertion of Rule 57G, with special reference to sub-rule
\n(5) powers to condone delay were available with the
\nAssistant Commissioner by recording reasons.   This very
\nfact   would   indicate that legislature has taken a
\nconscious decision while framing the present rule that
\nsuch power which was available with the authority shall
\nnot now be available. In the circumstances, it is not
\npossible to state that sub-rule (5) which prescribes the
\ntime limit is absolute in terms and is bad in law because
\nthere is no power with the authority to condone any delay
\nin availing of the modvat credit.\n<\/p>\n
8Rule 57G(1) on a plain reading indicates that in
\nnormal   circumstances a manufacturer is required to
\ndetermine prior to commencement of manufacturing process
\nthat the inputs intended to be used in the final product
\nare duty paid inputs and the manufacturer intends to take
\ncredit of such duty. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 57G of the
\nRules requires a manufacturer to take credit of the duty
\npaid on inputs after obtaining an acknowledgment of
\nhaving filed a declaration under sub-rule (1) of such
\nintention. Of course under sub-rule (9) an Assistant
\nCommissioner is empowered to condone the delay in filing
\nof such declaration and allow the manufacturer to take
\ncredit of duty already paid on the inputs, subject to the
\nprovisions of sub-rule (10) and for the reasons to be
\nrecorded in writing. Therefore, on a plain reading it is
\napparent that the rule making authority has envisaged a
\nsituation wherein making of declaration may be delayed
\nbut even this power to condone delay is circumscribed by
\nsub-rule (10) wherein one of the conditions for exercise
\nof such power of condonation requires that the same has
\nto be exercised after ensuring that the inputs were
\nreceived in the factory within a period of six months
\nfrom the date of filing of such declaration. Thus, in
\neffect when sub-rules (9) and (10) are read together they
\ncomplement the scheme envisaged by sub-rule (5).    Under
\nsub-rule (5) a manufacturer cannot avail of credit on
\n duty paid inputs after six months of the date of issue of
\nany document specified in sub-rule (3).   Under sub-rule
\n(3) various documents under cover of which the inputs are
\nreceived in the factory are mentioned. The legislative
\nintent is very clear i.e.   to verify that the inputs
\nreceived, which are supposed to be duty paid, are covered
\nby a particular document.      In other words within that
\nperiod of six months the revenue        authorities   can
\nbacktrack and cross check the supplier and the factum of
\nthe input having actually borne duty.\n<\/p>\n
9In the result, on an overall reading of the
\nscheme which is postulated by rule 57G of the Rules it is
\nnot possible to accept the contention raised on behalf of
\nthe petitioner.    There is nothing arbitrary about the
\ntime limit fixed by sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G of the Rules
\nand it is not possible to hold that the same is
\nultravires the Act, or the object sought to be achieved
\nby the provison, or the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
10.In the result, the petition is rejected.  Notice
\ndischarged. There shall be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
(D.A.Mehta, J)<\/p>\n
(H.N.Devani, J)
\nm.m.bhatt\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 10869 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Sd\/- and HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Sd\/- ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed […]<\/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-131136","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSpecial Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - 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\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Special Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-10T18:21:19+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-10T18:21:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1853,\"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\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\",\"name\":\"Special Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-10T18:21:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 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":"Special Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - 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\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Special Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-10T18:21:19+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-10T18:21:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011"},"wordCount":1853,"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\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011","name":"Special Civil Application No. ... vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-10T18:21:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/special-civil-application-no-vs-mr-jitendra-malkan-for-on-22-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Special Civil Application No. … vs Mr Jitendra Malkan For on 22 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\/131136","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=131136"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131136\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=131136"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=131136"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=131136"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}