{"id":148386,"date":"1993-02-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1993-02-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993"},"modified":"2017-08-27T07:05:36","modified_gmt":"2017-08-27T01:35:36","slug":"bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","title":{"rendered":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1993 SCR  (2)\t60, \t  1993 SCC  (3) 237<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K Singh<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Kuldip Singh (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nBHASKAR GAJANAN KAJREKAR\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nADMINISTRATOR, DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/02\/1993\n\nBENCH:\nKULDIP SINGH (J)\nBENCH:\nKULDIP SINGH (J)\nYOGESHWAR DAYAL (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1993 SCR  (2)\t60\t  1993 SCC  (3) 237\n JT 1993  Supl.\t    43\t  1993 SCALE  (1)683\n\n\nACT:\nCivil Services :\nCivil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972  Rule 13-PensionRetiree\nnot  given pension as he was not confirmed in any post\teven\nafter  23 years of service-On the availability of  permanent\npost-Entitlement  to confirmation-Payment of pension to\t the\nRetiree\t treating  him as  a  confirmed\t employee-Directions\nissued.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellant retired in 1977 after putting in 23 years  of\nservice.   But he was not given pension on the\tground\tthat\nthroughout  his service he was working on officiating  basis\nand  was never appointed substantively to any of  the  posts\nheld by him.  The appellant challenged the denial of pension\nto  him\t before\t the  Central  Administrative\tTribunal.The\nTribunal held that since the appellant retired from  service\nwithout\t holding  lien on any substantive post, he  was\t not\nentitled  to pension under Rule 13 of the  Central  Services\n(Pension) Rules, 1972.\tThe application of the appellant was\ndisposed of ex-parte by the Tribunal and his application for\nrestoration  and hearing was also rejected.   Against  these\norders\tof  the\t Tribunal appellant  preferred\tthe  present\nappeals.\nThe Respondents contested the appeals on the ground that the\nDepartmental  Promotion\t Committee  did\t not  recommend\t the\nappellant's  confirmation since two  departmental  enquiries\nwere  initiated against him, resulting in deduction  of\t Rs.\n4,000 from his gratuity, by way of punishment.\nAllowing the appeals, this Court,\nHELD:\t  1.  Admittedly the findings in the  two  enquiries\nwere  never communicated to the appellant during the  period\nof  his\t service.   Those  were served\ton  him\t only  after\nretirement The question of his confirmation which was due in\nthe year 1967 could not have been linked with the  enquiries\nwhich\twere   initiated  at  a\t much  later   stage.\t The\nDepartmental Promotion Commit60\n 61\ntee should have considered the appellant for confirmation on\nthe  basis of the record of the appellant as existed in\t the\nyear 1967\/1968.\t There is no material on record to show that\nthe  service  record  of the appellant\tprior  to  1970\t was\nadverse in any manner.\tEven the Departmental Promotion Com-\nmittee\tfound the confidential reports of the appellant\t for\nthe  last  three years as good.\t On the\t availability  of  a\npermanent  post\t of  Chief of Police on June  14,  1967\t the\nappellant  was\tentitled to be confirmed  against  the\tsaid\npost.\t It  was  wholly  arbitrary  on\t the  part  of\t the\nrespondents to have deferred the question of confirmation of\nthe  appellant on the ground that there were no\t Recruitment\nRules.\t The  appellant having served  the  respondents\t for\nabout  thirteen\t years, on June 14, 1967 when  the  post  of\nChief  of Police was made permanent and there being  nothing\nadverse\t against him at that point of time, he was  entitled\nto  be\tconfirmed  in the said post.  In that  view  of\t the\nmatter\tthe  appellant\twas a  confirmed  employee  when  he\nretired from service on July 31,1977. [63D-G]\n2.   The respondents are directed to treat the appellant  as\nhaving\tbeen  retired as a confirmed employee  and  fix\t his\npension and other post-retiral benefits on that basis.\t The\nrespondents  are  further directed to complete\tthe  pension\ncase  of the appellant within three months and pay  him\t all\nthe  arrears  of the pension within  two  months  thereafter\nalongwith 12% interest on the said arrears. [63H; 64A]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 724-725  of<br \/>\n1992.\n<\/p>\n<p>From the Judgment and Order dated 13.11.90 &amp; 10.8.90 of\t the<br \/>\nCentral\t Administrative\t Tribunal, New Bombay  in  M.P.\t No.<br \/>\n855\/90, &amp; O.A. No. 799 of 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p>N.M.  Ghatate,\tAnand  Prasad and  S.V.\t Deshpande  for\t the<br \/>\nAppellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>T.C. Sharma and Ms. A. Subhashini for the Respondents.<br \/>\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nKULDIP SINGH, J. Special leave granted in both the matters.<br \/>\nB.G. Kajrekar joined service as Chief of Police on August 1,<br \/>\n1954 in Dadra and Nagar Haveli.\t He worked in that  capacity<br \/>\nupto  April 19, 1966.  Thereafter he was sent on  deputation<br \/>\nto the Central Reserve Police,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">62<\/span><br \/>\nNeemuch (Madhya Pradesh).  He came back to his original post<br \/>\nin Dadra and Nagar Haveli on November 17, 1967 and worked as<br \/>\nChief  of Police upto April 6, 1971.  He was transferred  to<br \/>\nDelhi  Armed  Police  on April 7, 1971 where  he  worked  as<br \/>\nDeputy Superintendent of Police till his retirement on\tJuly<br \/>\n31,  1977.  He has thus, put in about twenty three years  of<br \/>\nservice.\n<\/p>\n<p>Kajrekar was not given pension on the ground that throughout<br \/>\nhis  service  he worked on officiating basis and  was  never<br \/>\nappointed  substantively  to any of the posts held  by\thim.<br \/>\nKajrekar  challenged the action of the respondents,  denying<br \/>\npension to him, before the Central Administrative  Tribunal,<br \/>\nBombay.\t The Tribunal rejected his application on the ground<br \/>\nthat  he  retired from service without holding lien  on\t any<br \/>\nsubstantive  post  and as such was not entitled\t to  pension<br \/>\nunder Rule 13 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules,<br \/>\n1972 (the Rules).  The application of Kajrekar was  disposed<br \/>\nof  ex-parte by the Tribunal and his prayer for\t restoration<br \/>\nand  hearing  was also rejected.  These appeals\t by  way  of<br \/>\nspecial\t leave\tpetitions  are against\tthe  orders  of\t the<br \/>\nCentral Administrative Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>It  is not disputed that the post of Chief of  Police  under<br \/>\nDadra and Nagar Haveli Administration was declared permanent<br \/>\nwith effect from June 14, 1967.\t On that date the  appellant<br \/>\nhad  already put in about thirteen years of service but\t his<br \/>\ncase for confirmation was not considered on the ground\tthat<br \/>\nthere  were no Recruitment Rules for the post in  existence.<br \/>\nThe Recruitment Rules for the post of Chief of Police  under<br \/>\nthe Administration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli came into force<br \/>\non  January 19, 1980.  The said Rules provided &#8220;by  transfer<br \/>\non  deputation&#8221; as the method of recruitment to the post  of<br \/>\nChief of Police.  The Recruitment Rules have no relevance to<br \/>\nthe  question  of confirmation of the appellant\t as  he\t had<br \/>\nretired\t from  service on January 31, 1977 much\t before\t the<br \/>\ncoming\tinto force of the Recruitment Rules.  It was  incum-<br \/>\nbent  on the respondents to have considered the question  of<br \/>\nconfirmation   of  the\tappellant  before  his\t retirement,<br \/>\nspecially  when\t he  was being\tretired\t after\tserving\t the<br \/>\nrespondents for twenty three years.  It was wholly arbitrary<br \/>\non the part of the respondents to have kept the appellant as<br \/>\nan  unconfirmed employee for a period of twenty three  years<br \/>\non  the ground that there were no Recruitment Rules for\t the<br \/>\npost he was holding.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli in its counter<br \/>\nfiled in this Court has stated that after the publication of<br \/>\nthe Recruitment Rules<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> 63<\/span><br \/>\na  Departmental Promotion Committee was convened on July  4,<br \/>\n1981  for  considering the question of confirmation  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant  as Chief of Policy.\tThe  Departmental  Promotion<br \/>\nCommittee  did not recommend the appellant for\tconfirmation<br \/>\non  the\t ground that during the course of his  service,\t two<br \/>\ndepartmental   enquiries   were\t  instituted   against\t the<br \/>\nappellant.  The enquiries could not be completed before\t the<br \/>\nappellant&#8217;s retirement and the findings were made  available<br \/>\nthereafter.   The proceedings of the Departmental  Promotion<br \/>\nCommittee further show that as a result of the enquiries Rs.<br \/>\n4,000  was  to be deducted from the gratuity amount  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant  as  a measure of  punishment.   The\tDepartmental<br \/>\nPromotion  Committee found that the confidential reports  of<br \/>\nthe  appellant\tfor the last three years were good  but\t the<br \/>\nCommittee declined to recommend confirmation because of\t the<br \/>\ntwo enquiries.\n<\/p>\n<p>It  is not disputed that the findings in the  two  enquiries<br \/>\nwere  never communicated to the appellant during the  period<br \/>\nof  his\t service.   Those  were served\ton  him\t only  after<br \/>\nretirement.  The question of his confirmation which was\t due<br \/>\nin  the\t year  1967  could not have  been  linked  with\t the<br \/>\nenquiries  which were initiated at a much later stage.\t The<br \/>\nDepartmental Promotion Committee should have considered\t the<br \/>\nappellant for confirmation on the basis of the record of the<br \/>\nappellant  as  existed in the year 1967\/1968.  There  is  no<br \/>\nmaterial  before us to show that the service record  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant prior to 1970 was adverse in any manner rather the<br \/>\naverments  made\t by the appellant in the  rejoinder  to\t the<br \/>\neffect\tthat  there was nothing adverse against him  on\t the<br \/>\nrecord prior to 1971, have not been controverted.  Even\t the<br \/>\nDepartmental  Promotion\t Committee  found  the\tconfidential<br \/>\nreports\t of the appellant for the last three years as  good.<br \/>\nWe  are of the view that on the availability of a  permanent<br \/>\npost  of Chief of Police on June 14, 1967 the appellant\t was<br \/>\nentitled  to  be confirmed against the said  post.   It\t was<br \/>\nwholly\tarbitrary for the respondents to have  deferred\t the<br \/>\nquestion of confirmation of the appellant on the ground that<br \/>\nthere  were no Recruitment Rules.  We, therefore, hold\tthat<br \/>\nthe  appellant\thaving\tserved\tthe  respondents  for  about<br \/>\nthirteen  years on June 14, 1967 when the post of  Chief  of<br \/>\nPolice\twas made permanent and there being  nothing  adverse<br \/>\nagainst\t him  at that point of time, he was entitled  to  be<br \/>\nconfirmed in the said post.  In that view of the matter\t the<br \/>\nappellant  was\ta confirmed employee when  he  retired\tfrom<br \/>\nservice on July 31, 1977.\n<\/p>\n<p>We, therefore, direct the respondents to treat the appellant<br \/>\nas having<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">64<\/span><br \/>\nbeen retired as a confirmed employee and fix his pension and<br \/>\nother  post-retiral  benefits  on that\tbasis.\t We  further<br \/>\ndirect\tthe respondents to complete the pension case of\t the<br \/>\nappellant within three months from today and pay him all the<br \/>\narrears\t  of  the  pension  within  two\t months\t  thereafter<br \/>\nalongwith  12% interest on the said arrears.  We  allow\t the<br \/>\nappeals with costs which we quantify as Rs. 10,000.<br \/>\nG.N.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeals allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">65<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993 Equivalent citations: 1993 SCR (2) 60, 1993 SCC (3) 237 Author: K Singh Bench: Kuldip Singh (J) PETITIONER: BHASKAR GAJANAN KAJREKAR Vs. RESPONDENT: ADMINISTRATOR, DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/02\/1993 BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH: [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-148386","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - 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\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\" \/>\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=\"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-27T01:35:36+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993\",\"datePublished\":\"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-27T01:35:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\"},\"wordCount\":1045,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\",\"name\":\"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-27T01:35:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993\"}]},{\"@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":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - 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\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-27T01:35:36+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993","datePublished":"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-27T01:35:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993"},"wordCount":1045,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993","name":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar ... on 23 February, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1993-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-27T01:35:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhaskar-gajanan-kajrekar-vs-administrator-dadra-and-nagar-on-23-february-1993#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhaskar Gajanan Kajrekar vs Administrator, Dadra And Nagar &#8230; on 23 February, 1993"}]},{"@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\/148386","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=148386"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/148386\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=148386"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=148386"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=148386"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}