{"id":136251,"date":"2010-06-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010"},"modified":"2016-07-31T11:22:31","modified_gmt":"2016-07-31T05:52:31","slug":"dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","title":{"rendered":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\/6992\/1988\t 11\/ 13\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. 6992 of 1988\n \n\nwith\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No.13926 of 2006\n \n\nin\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6992 of 1988\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n \n=============================================================  \n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\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\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\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 be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\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\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\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\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\n\t \n\t\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\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=============================================================\n \n\n \n\nDINANATH\nV VYAS - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nO\nN G C THROUGH CHAIRMAN SHRI VAHI OR SUCCESSOR & 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nDILIP B RANA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMS KJ BRAHMBHATT for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \nDELETED for Respondent(s) :\n3, \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 KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 16\/06\/2010\n \n\nCOMMON\nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
1.0
\n\tBy way of present petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for
\npromoting the petitioner as Assistant Engineer (Production) or to any
\nother equivalent post with effect from 01st January 1986
\nand to give him seniority and all other consequential benefits and
\nrestraining the respondents from promoting the respondent No.3 to the
\npost of Assistant Engineer, Class-II, prior to the promotion of the
\npetitioner as well as quashing and setting aside the seniority list
\nat Annexures-C and E.\n<\/p>\n
2.0
\n       It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner joined
\nthe service with the respondent-Commission with effect from 14th
\nSeptember 1965 as Fireman Grade-II. Thereafter, the petitioner was
\nselected as Production Operator\/ Junior Technician (Production) vide
\nOffice Order dated 11th December 1979 and the petitioner
\njoined on 02nd January 1980.  The petitioner completed the
\nprobation period successfully on 01st January 1981 which
\nwas communicated vide order dated 17th November 1981.
\nThereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Chargeman
\n(Production) with effect from 01st January 1984 vide order
\ndated 14th May 1984.  These facts are clear from the
\nprovisional seniority list of the Production Operators published by
\nthe respondent-Commission on 26th April 1984. Though the
\npetitioner had demanded a copy of the said seniority list, he was not
\nsupplied the same. When the copy of the said provisional seniority
\nlist was made available to the petitioner, the petitioner had
\nchallenged the same by amending the writ petition by filing Civil
\nApplication No.14700 of 2007.\n<\/p>\n
2.1\tBy
\nway of said application, the petitioner sought to amend the petition
\nchallenging the seniority list wherein juniors to the petitioner are
\nplaced at a higher level. Both the provisional seniority lists are of
\nthe year 1984 and 1985 and they have not become final.  So far as 22
\nyears’ policy is concerned, Clause-I and Clause-II are the main
\nclauses of the said policy and both of them are optional.\n<\/p>\n
2.2\tIn
\nboth the cases, the concerned employees become entitled for getting
\nthe promotion under the said policy and accordingly, the petitioner
\nwas entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer
\n(Production) with effect from 01st January 1986 in view of
\nprovisions of Clause-II of the said policy.\n<\/p>\n
3.0\tMr.D.B.\n<\/p>\n
Rana, learned advocate for the petitioner, has submitted that though
\nMr.B.S. Nayee, who is at Sr. No.122, joined service with the
\nrespondent-Commission on 06th May 1976 as Cleaner which is
\na Class-IV post, did not complete 22 years of service with the
\nrespondent-Commission on 01st January 1986, he has been
\npromoted as Assistant Engineer (Production)  on 01st
\nJanuary 1986 after his promotion to the posts of Junior Technician
\n(Production) and Chargeman respectively.\n<\/p>\n
3.1\tIt
\nis also the say of the petitioner that in the very same manner,
\nthough Mr.K.B. Patel, who joined the service with the
\nrespondent-Commission on 14th April 1975, did not complete
\nthe service of 22 years, has been promoted as Assistant Engineer
\n(Production) on 01st January 1986.\n<\/p>\n
3.2\tIt
\nis the case of the petitioner that though he joined the service in
\nthe year 1965, he has not been promoted to the post of Assistant
\nEngineer (Production) and instead his juniors have been promoted.\n<\/p>\n
3.3\tIt
\nis further the case of the petitioner that though Mr.A.P. Buddhija,
\nwho joined the service with respondent-Commission in the year 1967-68
\nwas promoted as Junior Technician (Production) on 24th
\nJanuary 1989 and thereafter, he was promoted as Chargeman on 27th
\nJanuary 1989. The petitioner apprehended that the said Mr.Buddhija
\nmay be appointed on the post of Assistant Engineer (Production) and,
\ntherefore, by way of amending the petition, he prayed for restraining
\nthe respondent-Commission from promoting Mr.Buddhija on the post of
\nAssistant Engineer (Production). Further, Mr.Buddhija was transferred
\nto Bombay office on his request and again he was transferred to
\nAhmedabad office. Thus, on transfer, the seniority is required to be
\nreckoned from the year 1989 and not from the date of his appointment.
\nThe petitioner has been deprived of the benefit of the said promotion
\npolicy.\n<\/p>\n
3.4\tIt
\nis, thus, the case of the petitioner that discrimination has been
\nmeted out to the petitioner by the respondents and the juniors to the
\npetitioner have been put on the higher rank. Hence, the present
\npetition.\n<\/p>\n
4.0\tMs.K.J.\n<\/p>\n
Brahmbhatt, learned advocate for the respondents, has relied upon the
\nreply affidavits and submitted that the case of the petitioner has
\nbeen considered on the basis of the policy of the
\nrespondent-Commission dated 15th December 1987 and on the
\nbasis of the said policy only, the promotions have been granted to
\nthe employees of the respondent-Commission at the relevant point of
\ntime.\n<\/p>\n
4.1\tIt
\nis submitted that looking to the Clauses of the said policy, there is
\nno discrimination as alleged by the petitioner. The case of the
\npetitioner has rightly been considered by the respondent-Commission
\nand no discriminatory treatment has been given to the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
4.2\tIt
\nis submitted that the seniority list of Junior Technician
\n(Production) was circulated to all concerned, including the
\npetitioner. However, he did not raised any objection to the same.\n<\/p>\n
4.3\tMs.Brahmbhatt,
\nlearned advocate for the respondent-Commission, has submitted that
\nthe petitioner cannot amend the petition after a period of 16 years
\nfrom the date of filing the petition. In respect of the same, she has
\nrelied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shiba
\nShankar Mohapatra and others v. State of Orissa and others, reported
\nin AIR 2010 SC 706. In
\nview of the same, it is submitted that the present petition may be
\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n
5.0\tHaving
\nconsidered the rival contentions, averments made in the petition,
\ndocumentary evidence produced on record and the reply affidavits as
\nwell as rejoinder affidavits filed by the respective parties,  it
\ntranspires that the petitioner was appointed purely on temporary and
\nad-hoc basis as Fireman Grade-II with effect from 14th
\nSeptember 1965 with monthly extension from time to time upto 10th
\nJuly 1968 and thereafter, the petitioner applied for the post of
\nTechnician Grade-IV and on selection, he was appointed on the said
\npost on regular basis with effect from 11th July 1968.
\nThereafter, the petitioner came to be appointed on the post of Junior
\nTechnician (Production) with effect from 16th October
\n1979.\n<\/p>\n
5.1\tThe
\npetitioner appeared before Departmental Promotion Committee on 16th
\nOctober 1979 for interview and was selected. It is pertinent to note
\nthat as per the further affidavit filed by the respondent-Commission
\ndated 12th October 2007, the petitioner was not promoted
\nbut was appointed on the post of Junior Technician (Production).\n<\/p>\n
5.2\tIt
\nis pertinent to note that the seniority list of Junior Technician
\n(Production) was circulated to all the concerned and that no
\nobjection was raised by anybody including the petitioner. The
\npetitioner has not raised any dispute qua the said seniority list at
\nthe relevant point of time and the dispute with respect to the same
\nhas been raised only in the year 2007 by way of an amended petition.\n<\/p>\n
5.3\tIt
\nis required to be noted that the petitioner came to be promoted to
\nthe post of Chargeman with effect from 01st January 1984.
\nThe said post is a promotional post. On promotion to the next higher
\nstage, the inter-seniority of the employees fixed at the time of
\nappointment\/ selection is not disturbed. Accordingly, while preparing
\nthe seniority list of the Chargeman (Production), the seniority of
\nthe employees at the time of their appointment to the post of Junior
\nTechnician (Production) was considered and the seniority was not
\ndisturbed. The following  comparative chart in the case of Shri K.B.
\nPatel, Shri B.S. Nayee, Shri B.V. Shindhe and the petitioner-D.V.
\nVyas will make the picture very clear :\n<\/p>\n
Sr.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\tNo.\n<\/p>\n
Particulars<\/p>\n
Shri
\n\t\t\tK.B. Patel<\/p>\n
Shri
\n\t\t\tB.S. Nayee<\/p>\n
Shri
\n\t\t\tB.V. Shindhe<\/p>\n
Petitioner-D.V.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\tVyas<\/p>\n
1.<\/p>\n
Date
\n\t\t\tand post of initial appointment in resp-ONGC<\/p>\n
Tech.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\tAssist.Gr-IV<\/p>\n
14.05.1975<\/p>\n
Cleaner<\/p>\n
06.05.1976<\/p>\n
Fireman
\n\t\t\tGr-II<\/p>\n
08.02.1963<\/p>\n
Fireman
\n\t\t\tGr-II<\/p>\n
14.09.1965<\/p>\n
2.<\/p>\n
Appointment\/
\n\t\t\tPromotion<\/p>\n
–\n<\/p>\n
Helper
\n\t\t\t(Auto)<\/p>\n
14.06.1976<\/p>\n
Fireman
\n\t\t\tGr-I<\/p>\n
24.12.1975<\/p>\n
Fireman
\n\t\t\tGr-I<\/p>\n
11.07.1968<\/p>\n
3.<\/p>\n
Date
\n\t\t\tof selection\/ Appointment to the post of Production Operation\/ JT
\n\t\t\t(P)<\/p>\n
09.05.1979<\/p>\n
02.08.1979<\/p>\n
16.10.1979<\/p>\n
16.10.1979<\/p>\n
4.<\/p>\n
Seniority
\n\t\t\tposition in Production Operator\/JT (P)<\/p>\n
70<\/span><\/p>\n
74<\/span><\/p>\n
103<\/span><\/p>\n
104<\/span><\/p>\n
5.<\/p>\n
Date
\n\t\t\tof joining to the post of Production Operator\/ JT(P)<\/p>\n
18.08.1979<\/p>\n
29.08.1979<\/p>\n
28.11.1979<\/p>\n
02.01.1980<\/p>\n
6.<\/p>\n
Promotion
\n\t\t\tto post of Chargeman (P)<\/p>\n
01.01.1984<\/p>\n
01.01.1984<\/p>\n
01.01.1984<\/p>\n
01.01.1984<\/p>\n
7.<\/p>\n
Seniority
\n\t\t\tposition in Chargeman (P) <\/p>\n
119<\/span><\/p>\n
122<\/span><\/p>\n
150<\/span><\/p>\n
151<\/span><\/p>\n
\t\tThus,
\n\tin pursuance of the aforesaid comparative chart, it transpires that
\n\tthe seniority position in Junior Technician (Production) i.e. JT
\n\t(P), is based on the date of selection as well as merit position in
\n\tthe selection list of any one of the particular occasion and the
\n\tsaid seniority order was maintained while preparing the seniority
\n\tlist of Chargeman keeping in mind the aforesaid seven criteria
\n\tmentioned in Sr. Nos.1 to 7. The seniority list is prepared both for
\n\tappointed as well as promoted posts. It is required to be noted that
\n\tthe employees shown hereinabove were not promoted to the post of
\n\tProduction Operation\/ Junior Technician (Production) from their
\n\trespective posts at Sr. Nos.1 and 2, but they were appointed to the
\n\tpost at Sr. No.3. Therefore, the seniority list was prepared based
\n\tupon the merit position in the seniority list.\n<\/p>\n
5.4
\n\tIt is required to be noted that after the post of Chargemen, the
\nnext promotional post is Assistant Engineer (Production).  As per the
\nMemorandum of Settlement entered into between the recognised unions
\nof Class-III employees and the respondent-ONGC, 22 years’ Policy was
\nintroduced. It would be beneficial to reproduce the relevant clauses
\nof the said policy as under :\n<\/p>\n
\tAll
\n\tsuch Class-III employees of disciplines other than Transport
\n\tOperators and Supervisors as have completed not less than 22 years
\n\tservice in Class-III in the Commission as on 31.12.1985 of which at
\n\tleast one year should be in the existing grade may be considered for
\n\tappointment by selection to the next higher grade.\n<\/p>\n
\tAll
\n\tthe Class-III employees senior to those with 22 years service as on
\n\t31.12.1985 in their respective career in the relevant regions may
\n\talso be considered for appointment on promotion to the next higher
\n\tgrade. Senior employees will be determined with reference to the
\n\trelevant regional seniorities of the respective orders only.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn
\n\torder to implement the above decision, applications will have to be
\n\tcalled for from the prospective eligible employees and their
\n\tsuitability assessed through DPC interview by the selection
\n\tcommittee on the basis of overall appraisal of their performance
\n\trecord and performance at the interview. The employees would have to
\n\tbe subjected to trade test \/ examination wherever prescribed under
\n\tR&P Regulations, 1980.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\n\ttreatment with regard to elevation of senior in terms of para (II)
\n\tabove may also be extended to the employees senior to the Transport
\n\temployees as well as the employees senior to the Class-IV employees
\n\tin their respective cardres \/ regions already upgraded with effect
\n\tfrom 1.1.86.\n<\/p>\n
5.5
\n\tThere were two main criteria for promotion in view of the aforesaid
\npolicy. Firstly, the Class-III employee should have completed not
\nless than 22 years of service as on 31st December 1985.
\nSecondly, all those Class-III employees senior to those who have got
\npromotion under 22 years policy, may also be considered for promotion
\nto the next higher grade even without completing 22 years of service
\nin the respondent-Commission on 31st December 1985.\n<\/p>\n
5.6\tIt
\nis required to be noted that the said Shri K.B. Patel, Shri B.S.
\nNayee and the petitioner-D.V.Vyas had not completed 22 years of
\nservice in the respondent-Commission on 31st December
\n1985, but they were at Sr. Nos.119, 122 and 151 respectively in the
\nregional seniority list of the respondent-ONGC circulated vide
\nCircular dated 20th November 1985, whereas Shri B.B.
\nShindhe was at Sr. No.150 in the said seniority list.\n<\/p>\n
5.7\tFurther,
\nsince Shri B.B. Shindhe has completed 22 years of service in the
\nrespondent-Commission as on 31st December 1985, he has got
\npromotion under Clause-I of the said 22 years Policy and accordingly,
\nas per Clause-II of the said 22 years Policy, employees senior to
\nShri B.B. Shindhe were also to be considered for promotion and,
\ntherefore, they were also granted promotion. So far as the present
\npetitioner is concerned, he is junior to Shri B.B. Shindhe and
\ntherefore, his case was not considered for promotion under Clause-II
\nof the said 22 years Policy. In view of the same, no illegality
\nwhatsoever is committed by the respondent-Commission while giving
\neffect to the 22 years Policy.\n<\/p>\n
5.8\tHere
\nit is pertinent to note that by way of his rejoinder affidavit, the
\npetitioner himself has admitted that he is not entitled to promotion
\nunder Clause-I of 22 years Policy. He prays for promotion only under
\nClause-II of the said policy. Thus, the scope of challenge of his
\ncase is limited by him only to Clause-II of the said policy. Now when
\nnone of the juniors in the existing cardre of the petitioner was
\ngiven benefit under Clause-II of the said policy, the petitioner too
\nwas not given the benefit of the said policy.\n<\/p>\n
5.9\tFurther,
\nthe contention of the petitioner that the decision of the Gauhati
\nHigh Court in Civil Rule No.1198 of 1993 will squarely help him, does
\n not require acceptance since the said decision is altogether on a
\ndifferent point. It has no nexus with the facts of the present case.
\nIn the said case, the dispute was qua promotes and direct recruits in
\nClass-III and that too under other promotion policy and order dated
\n03rd January 1989 and not under 22 years’ Policy. Thus,
\nthe said judgment cannot be applied to the facts of the present case.\n<\/p>\n
5.10\tSo
\nfar as the case of Shri A.D. Chaubal and Shri Pavankumar G. is
\nconcerned, it is required to be noted that as stated in the foregoing
\nparagraphs, the seniority list is prepared both for appointed as well
\nas promoted posts. It is required to be noted that the employees
\nshown hereinabove were not promoted to the post of Production
\nOperation\/ Junior Technician (Production) from their respective
\nposts, but they were appointed to the post of Junior Technician
\n(Production). Therefore, the seniority list was prepared based upon
\nthe merit position in the seniority list.\n<\/p>\n
5.11\tIt
\nis pertinent to note that the petitioner has raised objection qua the
\nseniority list after such a long period in the year 2007. It would be
\nbeneficial to reproduce the relevant paragraph 29 of the decision in
\nthe case of Shiba Shankar (supra), whereby the Apex
\nCourt has held as under :\n<\/p>\n
 29.
\n\t \tThus, in view of the above, the settled legal proposition that
\nemerges is that once the seniority had been fixed and it remains in
\nexistence for a reasonable period, any challenge to the same should
\nnot be entertained. In K.R. Mudgal, (AIR 1986 SC 2086) (supra), this
\nCourt has laid down, in crystal clear words that a seniority list
\nwhich remains in existence for 3 to 4 years unchallegned, should not
\nbe disturbed. Thus, 3-4 years is a reasonable period for challenging
\nthe seniority  and in case someone agitates the issue of seniority
\nbeyond this petitiod, he has to explain the delay and laches in
\napproaching the adjudicatory forum, by furnishing satisfactory
\nexplanation.\n<\/p>\n
5.12\tIt
\nis pertinent to note that in the present case the petitioner has
\napproached this Court after a period of about 20 years in the year
\n2007 challenging the said seniority list by amending the petition and
\nno plausible explanation is coming forth for such a grave delay. In
\nthat view of the matter, the seniority list which has achieved
\nfinality by now deserves to be confirmed. Therefore, in light of the
\naforesaid decision of the Apex Court also, the present petition
\ndeserves to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
5.13\tIn
\nview of aforesaid and in light of the decision of the above cited
\ndecision of the Apex Court, I am of the opinion that the petitioner
\nis not entitled to any benefit of the said 22 years’ Policy. The
\nseniority lists are just and proper. I do not find any illegality or
\nperversity in the said seniority lists. The present petition is
\ndevoid of any substance and merit and the same is required to be
\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n
6.0\tFor
\nthe foregoing reasons, the present petition fails and is,
\naccordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.
\nInterim relief, if any, stands vacated.\n<\/p>\n
\t\tIn view of disposal of the main petition, Civil Application
\nNo.13926 of 2006 does not survive and the same stands disposed of
\naccordingly.\n<\/p>\n
(K.S.\n<\/p>\n
Jhaveri, J)<\/p>\n
Aakar<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/6992\/1988 11\/ 13 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6992 of 1988 with CIVIL APPLICATION No.13926 of 2006 in SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6992 of 1988 For Approval […]<\/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-136251","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - 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\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-31T05:52:31+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-31T05:52:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2651,\"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\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\",\"name\":\"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-31T05:52:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 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":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - 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\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-31T05:52:31+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-31T05:52:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010"},"wordCount":2651,"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\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010","name":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-31T05:52:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinanath-vs-o-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dinanath vs O on 16 June, 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\/136251","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=136251"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136251\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=136251"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=136251"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=136251"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}