{"id":135364,"date":"2010-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010"},"modified":"2018-11-18T23:48:54","modified_gmt":"2018-11-18T18:18:54","slug":"divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M.R. Shah,&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\/8760\/2010\t 5\/ 5\tJUDGMENT \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. 8760 of 2010\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10772 of 2010\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH\n \n=========================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================\n \n\nDIVISIONAL\nCONTROLLER - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nBALWANTSINGH\nCHATURSINGH SOLANKI ( C\/O NORDOSH H RATHOD)-Respondent(s)\n \n\n========================================= \nAppearance\n: \nMS KIRAN D\nPANDEY for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR\nMUKESH H RATHOD for Respondent(s) :\n1, \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 M.R. SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 22\/09\/2010 \n\n \n\nCOMMON\nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tRule.\n<\/p>\n<p> Shri Mukesh H. Rathod, learned<br \/>\nadvocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent<br \/>\nin Special Civil Application No.8760\/2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAs<br \/>\nboth these petitions arise out of one impugned judgment and award<br \/>\npassed by the Labour Court, Himatnagar in Reference (LCH) No.60\/2004<br \/>\nand as such both the petitions can be said to be cross petitions,<br \/>\nthey are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tSpecial<br \/>\nCivil Application No.8760\/2010 has been preferred by the petitioner<br \/>\nGujarat State Road Transport Corporation challenging the impugned<br \/>\njudgment and award dated 25.11.2009 passed by the Labour Court,<br \/>\nHimmatnagar in Reference (LCH) No.60\/2004, by which the Labour Court<br \/>\nhas partly allowed the said reference directing the petitioner to pay<br \/>\nall benefits available to the respondent inclusive of retiral<br \/>\nbenefits with 40% back wages from the date of termination i.e.<br \/>\n01.10.2002 to 31.10.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSpecial<br \/>\nCivil Application No.10772\/2010 has been preferred by the workman<br \/>\nconductor challenging the aforesaid judgment and award passed by the<br \/>\nLabour Court, Himmatnagar in Reference (LCH) No.60\/2004 insofar as<br \/>\nthere is no specific order passed by the Labour Court in quashing and<br \/>\nsetting aside the order of termination and passing the order of<br \/>\nreinstatement atleast till the workman attain the age of<br \/>\nsuperannuation i.e. 31.10.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective<br \/>\nparties, it appears that in a departmental inquiry, charge of<br \/>\nremaining unauthorizedly  absent for 20 days came to be proved.  It<br \/>\nis an admitted position that the workman did not participated in the<br \/>\ninquiry.  That on conclusion of the departmental inquiry and having<br \/>\nfound that the charge of remaining unauthorizedly  absent for 20 days<br \/>\ncame to be proved and considering his earlier 11<br \/>\nmisconducts\/defaults, petitioner Gujarat State Road Transport<br \/>\nCorporation passed an order of dismissal, which came to be challenged<br \/>\nby the workman, which was referred to the Labour Court, Himmatnagar<br \/>\nand which was numbered as Reference (LCH) No.60\/2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tMs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Kiran Pandey, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner<br \/>\nCorporation has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the<br \/>\ncase, when the charge and misconduct of remaining unauthorizedly<br \/>\nabsent came to be proved and considering the fact that there were 11<br \/>\ndefaults committed by the workman in past, the learned Labour Court<br \/>\nhas materially erred in quashing and setting aside the order of<br \/>\ndismissal and directing the petitioner to pay all consequential<br \/>\nbenefits available to the respondent with 40% back wages from the<br \/>\ndate of dismissal till the respondent attain the age of<br \/>\nsuperannuation i.e. 31.10.2005.  It is further submitted that in such<br \/>\na case and situation, the Labour Court has materially erred in<br \/>\nexercising powers under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOn<br \/>\nthe other hand, Shri Mukesh Rathod, learned advocate appearing on<br \/>\nbehalf of the respondent   workman has submitted that considering<br \/>\n29 years of service as a conductor and the charge proved against the<br \/>\nworkman with respect to remaining unauthorizedly absent for 20 days,<br \/>\nwhen the Labour Court found that order of punishment and dismissal is<br \/>\ndisproportionate to the charge and misconduct proved and when the<br \/>\nLabour Court interfered with the same and exercised discretion under<br \/>\nSection 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the same is not required<br \/>\nto be interfered by this Court while exercising powers under Article<br \/>\n227 of the Constitution of India.  Shri Mukesh Rathod, learned<br \/>\nadvocate appearing on behalf of the workman has submitted, under the<br \/>\ninstruction of his client, that he has no objection if the impugned<br \/>\njudgment and award passed by the Labour Court awarding 40% back wages<br \/>\nfrom the date of termination till 31.10.2005 i.e. the date on which<br \/>\nthe respondent attain the age of superannuation, is quashed and set<br \/>\naside and petitioner is directed to pay the retiral benefits to the<br \/>\nworkman.  It is submitted by him that as such, as so observed by the<br \/>\nLabour Court in the impugned judgment and award, respondent has<br \/>\nalready been paid retiral<br \/>\nbenefits like provident fund, gratuity.  Therefore, it is requested<br \/>\nto consider the aforesaid.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties and<br \/>\nconsidering the facts and circumstances, it appears that the charge<br \/>\nof remaining unauthorizedly absent for 20 days came to be established<br \/>\nand proved in a departmental inquiry.  The aforesaid is required to<br \/>\nbe considered alongwith other 11 defaults committed by the respondent<br \/>\nworkman in the past.  Under the circumstances, the Labour Court has<br \/>\ncommitted an error in awarding 40% back wages from the date of<br \/>\ndismissal till the respondent workman attain the age of<br \/>\nsuperannuation.  In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and<br \/>\nconsidering the 11 defaults committed by the respondent, it is very<br \/>\ndebatable issue whether the Labour Court was justified in quashing<br \/>\nand setting aside the order of dismissal passed under Section 11A of<br \/>\nthe Industrial Disputes Act.  However, considering the fact that the<br \/>\nrespondent had 29 years of service and had already retired in the<br \/>\nmeantime and had attained the age of superannuation on 31.10.2005 and<br \/>\nthat he has already been paid benefits like provident fund, gratuity,<br \/>\nit will be just and proper to confirm that part of the order by which<br \/>\nthe Labour Court has directed the petitioner to pay all retiral<br \/>\nbenefits to the respondent, which are as such already paid.  However,<br \/>\nthe Labour Court is not justified in awarding 40% back wages from the<br \/>\ndate of dismissal till the respondent attain the age of<br \/>\nsuperannuation i.e. 31.10.2005.  Even Shri Rathod, learned advocate<br \/>\nappearing on behalf of the respondent, under the instruction of his<br \/>\nclient, has agreed that if the respondent is paid the retiral<br \/>\nbenefits considering his 29 years of service and the impugned<br \/>\njudgment and award passed by the Labour Court awarding 40% back wages<br \/>\nfrom the date of dismissal i.e. 31.10.2005, is hereby quashed and set<br \/>\naside, he has no objection and therefore, the impugned<br \/>\njudgment and award deserves to be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn<br \/>\nview of the above, Special Civil Application No.8760\/2010 is partly<br \/>\nallowed and in peculiar facts and circumstances and more particularly<br \/>\nwhen the respondent has already attained the age of superannuation<br \/>\ni.e. 31.10.2005 and he has already been paid retiral benefits like<br \/>\nprovident fund and gratuity, the impugned judgment and award passed<br \/>\nby the Labour Court, Himmatnagar dated 25.11.2009 in Reference (LCH)<br \/>\nNo.60\/2004, is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent by which<br \/>\nthe Labour Court has directed the petitioner to pay 40% back wages<br \/>\nand other benefits from the date of dismissal till 31.10.2005 and it<br \/>\nis held that the respondent shall be entitled to only retiral<br \/>\nbenefits like provident fund and gratuity.  Rule is made absolute to<br \/>\nthe aforesaid extent so far as Special Civil Application No.8760\/2010<br \/>\nis concerned and in view of the above, no further order is required<br \/>\nto be passed in Special Civil Application No.10772\/2010 and is,<br \/>\naccordingly, disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>(M.R.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shah, J.)<\/p>\n<p>*menon<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010 Author: M.R. Shah,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/8760\/2010 5\/ 5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8760 of 2010 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10772 of 2010 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH [&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-135364","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>Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 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\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-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=\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-18T18:18:54+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-18T18:18:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1132,\"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\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-18T18:18:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 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":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 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\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-18T18:18:54+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-18T18:18:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010"},"wordCount":1132,"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\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010","name":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-18T18:18:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/divisional-vs-balwantsingh-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Divisional vs Balwantsingh on 22 September, 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\/135364","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=135364"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135364\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=135364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=135364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=135364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}