{"id":164412,"date":"2011-03-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2"},"modified":"2018-09-04T19:07:16","modified_gmt":"2018-09-04T13:37:16","slug":"patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","title":{"rendered":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/823\/2011\t 12\/ 12\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. 823 of 2011\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHON'BLE\nSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n \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 \n\nPATEL\nKAMLESHKUMAR KANTILAL - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 5 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=====================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMr.S.I.Nanavati,\nlearned Senior Advocate with Mr.Saurabh Mehta and  MS\nANUJA S NANAVATI for Petitioner \nMr.Maulik G.Nanavati,learned\nASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondents Nos: 1 - 2. \nMR PV HATHI\nfor Respondents Nos: 3 - 4. \nMR BHUNESH C RUPERA and MRS REKHA H\nKAPADIA for Respondents Nos: 5 -\n6. \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\nHON'BLE\n\t\t\tSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 15\/03\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tRule.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Maulik G.Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives<br \/>\nservice of notice of Rule for respondents Nos.1 and 2.<br \/>\nMr.P.V.Hathi,learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for<br \/>\nrespondents Nos.3 and 4. Mr.Bhunesh C. Rupera and Ms.Rekha H.Kapadia,<br \/>\nlearned advocates wavies service of notice of Rule for respondents<br \/>\nNos.5 and 6.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThis<br \/>\npetition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been<br \/>\nfiled with the following prayers:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;A)<br \/>\nYour Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any<br \/>\nother appropriate writ, order or diction by quashing and setting aide<br \/>\nthe impugned order dated 07\/01\/2011 at Annexure &#8216;A&#8217; and further be<br \/>\npleased to direct the Respondents, their servants, agents and<br \/>\nsubordinates to reinstate the Petitioner in service as Vidya Sahayak<br \/>\nwith continuity of service and with all other consequential and<br \/>\nincidental benefits as if no order of cancellation of appointment is<br \/>\never passed against the present Petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>(B)<br \/>\nPending hearing and till final disposal of the present petition, Your<br \/>\nLordships may be pleased to stay and suspend the further<br \/>\nimplementation, operation, execution and enforcement of the impugned<br \/>\njudgment dated 07\/01\/2011 at Annexure &#8216;A&#8217; and further be pleased to<br \/>\nrestrain the Respondent their servants, agents, subordinates from<br \/>\nmaking any appointment on the post where the Petitioner was<br \/>\ndischarging his duties as Vidya Sahayak and further be pleased to<br \/>\ndirect their servants, agents and subordinates to keep the said post<br \/>\nvacant till the final disposal of the present petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>(C)\tAny<br \/>\n\tother and further relief that this Hon&#8217;ble Court may deem fit and<br \/>\n\tproper be passed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tRespondent<br \/>\nNo.4, District Primary Education Officer issued an advertisement for<br \/>\nappointment of Vidya Sahayaks in District Jamnagar. Pursuant thereto,<br \/>\nthe petitioner applied in the prescribed form, along with necessary<br \/>\ndocuments and was given appointment as Vidya Sahayak. Certain<br \/>\ncomplaints were received by the authorities regarding purported<br \/>\nirregularities in the process of selection of Vidya Sahayaks.<br \/>\nPursuant thereto, the Director of Primary Education ordered an<br \/>\ninquiry to be conducted. The said inquiry was conducted by the Deputy<br \/>\nDirector of Primary Education. The Inquiry  Officer submitted his<br \/>\nReport on 28-7-2010. After receipt thereof, the Director of Primary<br \/>\nEducation instructed the District Primary Education Officer to<br \/>\ninitiate proceedings, based upon the findings in the Inquiry Report.<br \/>\nThe District Primary Education Officer issued show cause notices to<br \/>\n84 persons named in the Report, including the petitioner. The<br \/>\nnoticees were given personal hearing and their statements were<br \/>\nrecorded. Thereafter, by the impugned order dated 07-01-2011 passed<br \/>\nby the District Primary Education Officer (Respondent No.4), the<br \/>\nservices of 84 persons,including the petitioner,were terminated.<br \/>\nAggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing<br \/>\nthe present petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tA<br \/>\nCaveat was filed by respondent No.4. Therefore, this Court, before<br \/>\nissuing notice on 28-01-2011, extensively heard the submissions made<br \/>\nby Mr.S.I.Nanavati, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and<br \/>\nMr.P.V.Hathi, learned advocate for respondents Nos.3 and 4. On<br \/>\nperusal of the impugned order dated 07-01-2011, it was prima facie<br \/>\nobserved by this Court, that the said order is self- contradictory,<br \/>\ninasmuch as it is stated in the first paragraph thereof that the<br \/>\nSports Certificates of the petitioner were not appended to the<br \/>\napplication. In the second paragraph it is stated that the Sports<br \/>\nCertificates have not been certified whereas, in the third paragraph<br \/>\nit is stated that the Sports Certificates have been submitted later<br \/>\non. The Court also took note of the submissions advanced by the<br \/>\nlearned Senior Advocate for the  petitioner that before passing the<br \/>\nimpugned order, the petitioner was not granted an effective<br \/>\nopportunity of meeting with the allegations leveled against him, as<br \/>\nthe Report of the inquiry  and documents relied upon by the District<br \/>\nPrimary Education Officer, had not been supplied to him.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tToday,<br \/>\nwhen the matter is taken up it is stated by Mr.Maulik G.Nanavati,<br \/>\nlearned Assistant Government Pleader, upon instructions from<br \/>\nMr.R.C.Rawal, Director, Primary Education, Government of Gujarat, who<br \/>\nis present in the Court today, that a Committee comprising of three<br \/>\nOfficers, including one Officer from the Office of the Director,<br \/>\nPrimary Education, one Officer from the Education Department not<br \/>\nbelow the rank of Under Secretary, and the District Primary Education<br \/>\nOfficer,Jamnagar who is the appointing authority, shall be<br \/>\nconstituted by the State Government. The said Committee will issue<br \/>\nindividual show cause notices to all 84 individuals, whose names<br \/>\nfigure in the Inquiry Report, including the  petitioner, specifying<br \/>\nthe allegations against them and annexing a copy of the Inquiry<br \/>\nReport as well as copies of any other documents relied upon against<br \/>\nthem. The concerned individuals may file written replies to the show<br \/>\ncause notices. Thereafter, each individual shall be afforded an<br \/>\nopportunity of personal hearing. The personal hearing shall take<br \/>\nplace at Jamnagar. Thereafter, individual orders shall be passed<br \/>\nwhich shall be communicated to the concerned persons by Registered<br \/>\nPost. Till such time, as the final order is passed, 84 posts of Vidya<br \/>\nSahayaks would be kept vacant in District Jamnagar by the District<br \/>\nPrimary Education Officer.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tAt<br \/>\nthis stage, Mr.S.I.Nanavati, learned Senior Advocate for the<br \/>\npetitioner states that in case the petitioner is found innocent and<br \/>\nis absolved of all charges by the Committee, he shall claim only<br \/>\ncontinuity of service as though the termination had not taken place.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tMr.Maulik<br \/>\nG.Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader, in response to the<br \/>\nabove statement of the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner<br \/>\nstates, upon instructions that in case the petitioner is found<br \/>\ninnocent and absolved of all the charges by the Committee, an<br \/>\nappropriate decision regarding continuity of service shall be taken<br \/>\nby the Committee.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tMr.S.I.Nanavati,<br \/>\nlearned Senior Advocate,  has brought to the notice of this Court<br \/>\norder dated 04-03-2011 issued by the Taluka Development Officer<br \/>\npursuant to instructions by respondent No.4 dated 24-02-2011, whereby<br \/>\nrecovery of the entire amount of salary of the petitioner from the<br \/>\ntime he was appointed, has been sought to be effected. A specimen<br \/>\ncopy of the  said order is tendered by the learned Senior Advocate<br \/>\nand is taken on the record of the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard the learned advocates for the respective parties and in view of<br \/>\nthe statements made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader and<br \/>\nlearned Senior Advocate at the Bar, the following order is passed:\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)\tAs<br \/>\nthe order dated 07-01-2011 suffers from inherent contradictions,<br \/>\ninasmuch as it is stated in the  first paragraph thereof that the<br \/>\nSports Certificates of the petitioner were not appended to the<br \/>\napplication and  in the second paragraph it is stated that the Sports<br \/>\nCertificates have not been certified, whereas, in the third paragraph<br \/>\nit is stated that the Sports Certificates have been submitted later<br \/>\non; it clearly appears that the said order has been passed without<br \/>\nproper application of mind. It is also not clear from the said order<br \/>\nwhether one, or all, of the alleged defects  have been found in the<br \/>\ncase of the petitioner as the order is identical in all cases. It is<br \/>\nfurther noticed that in the said  order it is mentioned that the High<br \/>\nCourt, by order dated 15-9-2010, passed<br \/>\nin Special Civil Application No.8875 of 2010 with Special Civil<br \/>\nApplication No.9412 of 2010, has directed that 84 candidates<br \/>\nbe  proceeded against, pursuant to the Inquiry Report. However, upon<br \/>\nperusal of the said order of this Court, it is found that it contains<br \/>\nno such direction. The observations made in paragraph 3 of the said<br \/>\norder, which appear to have been misunderstood by the respondent,<br \/>\nhave since been clarified by the Division Bench,  in order dated<br \/>\n31-01-2011, passed in Letters patent Appeal (St.) No.145 of 2011,<br \/>\nwherein it has been stated that such observations cannot be read as a<br \/>\nmandate or a direction by the High Court to the authority for<br \/>\ncancellation of the appointment.\n<\/p>\n<p>(b)\tIt<br \/>\nhas also been submitted by the learned Senior Advocate for the<br \/>\npetitioner that before passing the impugned order neither the<br \/>\ndocuments relied upon against the petitioner nor a copy of the<br \/>\nInquiry Report have been given to him. This aspect is not denied by<br \/>\nthe learned advocate for respondent No.4 by submitting that the<br \/>\npetitioner did not demand the documents or the Inquiry Report,<br \/>\ntherefore, they were not supplied. The<br \/>\nreason for not supplying the documents relied upon against the<br \/>\npetitioner and a copy of the Inquiry Report, cannot be countenanced<br \/>\nby this Court.  It is a settled position<br \/>\nof law that no action entailing adverse, or civil consequences, can<br \/>\nbe taken  without affording the person concerned a proper and<br \/>\nadequate opportunity to meet with the allegations levelled against<br \/>\nhim. When the copy of the Inquiry Report and documents relied upon<br \/>\nagainst the petitioner have  not been supplied to him, it cannot be<br \/>\nsaid that an effective or  adequate opportunity of hearing has been<br \/>\nafforded. In such circumstances, calling the petitioner for personal<br \/>\nhearing would amount to a mere formality.\n<\/p>\n<p>(c)<br \/>\nAs the impugned order dated 07-01-2011 has been passed in violation<br \/>\nof the principles of natural justice, the same cannot be sustained.<br \/>\nIt is, therefore, quashed and set aside. As a result thereof, the<br \/>\nconsequential order dated 04-03-2011 (and any other such order)<br \/>\ndirecting recovery of salary would also, not stand. The petitioner<br \/>\nshall now appear before the Committee to be constituted by the State<br \/>\nGovernment, at the time, and on the date, as<br \/>\nshall be intimated by respondent No.4 on behalf of the Committee. All<br \/>\ncommunications addressed to the petitioner shall be by Registered<br \/>\nPost, at the addresses to be supplied by Mr. Saurabh Mehta,  learned<br \/>\nadvocate who is appearing with the learned Senior Advocate for the<br \/>\npetitioner, to the learned Assistant Government Pleader and learned<br \/>\nadvocate for respondents Nos.3 and 4, within a period of  one week<br \/>\nfrom today.\n<\/p>\n<p>(d)\tInsofar<br \/>\nas individuals, other than the petitioner are concerned, the<br \/>\ncommunications would be sent at the addresses mentioned in their<br \/>\napplications,as submitted by the learned Assistant Government<br \/>\nPleader.\n<\/p>\n<p>(e)\tThe<br \/>\nCommittee,  constituted in this regard, shall complete the inquiry,<br \/>\npreferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt<br \/>\nof a copy of this order. As stated by the learned Assistant<br \/>\nGovernment  Pleader, these 84 posts of Vidya Sahayaks in District<br \/>\nJamnagar shall be kept vacant till the conclusion of the proceedings<br \/>\nof the Committee. In case the order passed by the Committee is<br \/>\nadverse to the petitioner, the same shall not take effect for a<br \/>\nperiod of thirty days from the date of communication of the said<br \/>\norder.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tThe<br \/>\npetition is partly-allowed, to the above extent. Rule is made<br \/>\nabsolute, accordingly. There shall  be no orders as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>   \t\t           \t(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J)<\/p>\n<p>arg<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/823\/2011 12\/ 12 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 823 of 2011 For Approval and Signature: HON&#8217;BLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI ===================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers [&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-164412","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - 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\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\" \/>\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=\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-04T13:37:16+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T13:37:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\"},\"wordCount\":1791,\"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\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\",\"name\":\"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T13:37:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - 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\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-04T13:37:16+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T13:37:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2"},"wordCount":1791,"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\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2","name":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T13:37:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/patel-vs-state-on-15-march-2011-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Patel vs State on 15 March, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/164412","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=164412"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164412\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=164412"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=164412"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=164412"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}