{"id":172829,"date":"2008-09-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-03-09T14:26:51","modified_gmt":"2018-03-09T08:56:51","slug":"agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Jayant Patel,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCA\/8746\/2008\t 6\/ 10\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION - FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF No. 8746 of 2008\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6353 of 2007\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nAGRICULTURAL\nPRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, VERAVAL - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nVADODARA\nZALA VIVIDH KARYAKARISEVA SAHKARI MANDALI &amp; 11 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nPRAKASH K JANI for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR TUSHAR MEHTA for Respondent(s) : 1 - 6. \nMR\nPANDYA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 7, \nRULE NOT RECD BACK for\nRespondent(s) : 7 -\n12. \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 JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 08\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tapplicant has preferred the application for modification of the<br \/>\n\torder dated 9.3.2007 passed by this Court so far as it relates to<br \/>\n\tprohibiting the Market Committee from taking any policy decision and<br \/>\n\tfrom granting any new licence to the traders.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr.Jani, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, Mr.Nanavati,<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel with Mr.Ketan Shah for the original petitioner and<br \/>\n\tMr.Pandya, learned AGP for opponents No.7 and 8.\n<\/p>\n<p>As<br \/>\n\tsuch when the Administrator, who is having all the powers of the<br \/>\n\tMarket Committee, once had applied for vacation of the interim<br \/>\n\trelief, which has not been granted by this Court (Coram: Smt.<br \/>\n\tAbhilasha Kumari, J.) vide order dated 4.3.2008 in Civil Application<br \/>\n\tNo.895 of 2008 in Special Civil Application No.6353 of 2007, the<br \/>\n\tpresent application by projecting the Market Committee through<br \/>\n\tSecretary, who is the employee of the Market Committee having no<br \/>\n\tpower to grant licence or to take any policy decision, is not<br \/>\n\tmaintainable.  As per the Scheme of the Act read with the Rules, the<br \/>\n\tpowers of the Market Committee vest to the Administrator and he did<br \/>\n\tprefer the application for modification and vacation of the interim<br \/>\n\trelief being Civil Application No.895 of 2008, which was not<br \/>\n\tgranted.  Therefore, the present application as such can be said as<br \/>\n\tnot maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tmay be recorded that the learned Counsel for the original<br \/>\n\tpetitioner, during the course of the hearing, by relying upon the<br \/>\n\tdecision of this Court in the case of Vithalbhai Hansrajbhai<br \/>\n\tRadadiya &amp; Ors. v. State of Gujarat &amp; Ors. , reported in<br \/>\n\t2006(4) GLR, 2747 submitted<br \/>\n\tthat if this Court is inclined to consider the matter for ordering<br \/>\n\telection as was ordered in the said case, the elected body being the<br \/>\n\trepresentative of the voters can be assigned with the powers and the<br \/>\n\tregular functioning of the Market Committee may be assured.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt<br \/>\n\tappears that earlier Bench of this Court did call for the response<br \/>\n\tof the State Government for ordering of the election, however, the<br \/>\n\tcommunication dated 1.9.2008 is placed on record by the learned AGP<br \/>\n\tfrom the State government, which shows that the Government is<br \/>\n\tdesirous to take policy decision and is also desirous to appoint a<br \/>\n\tnominated Committee, but there is no express willingness shown on<br \/>\n\tbehalf of the Government or the Election Authority to hold the<br \/>\n\telection of the Market Committee in question. It may be recorded<br \/>\n\tthat this Court in the aforesaid decision in case of  Vithalbhai<br \/>\n\tHansrajbhai Radadiya &amp; Ors. v. State of Gujarat &amp; Ors.<br \/>\n\t(supra) did observe at para 21 as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p> 21.\t\tIn<br \/>\n\tany democracy, election by the people and for the people is the real<br \/>\n\tspirit and can rather be described as a soul to survive the<br \/>\n\tdemocracy and democratic principles in any State or institutions or<br \/>\n\tlocal body upto the grass root level.  No executive in democracy can<br \/>\n\tbe heard to say that the process of administration would continue by<br \/>\n\texecutive fiat and let the election be not held, if no convenient<br \/>\n\tatmosphere to hold the election.  The systematic mechanism of<br \/>\n\tholding power through the electorate that too within the time bound<br \/>\n\tprogramme is the gist of governance conceived and expressly provided<br \/>\n\tin all statutes governing the constitution, administration,<br \/>\n\treconstitution and rather perpetual succession of the local bodies<br \/>\n\tor statutory bodies.  The normal principle or the normal rule would<br \/>\n\tbe the holding of power or of governance of statutory body through<br \/>\n\tits electorate and the role of executives or rather the supervisory<br \/>\n\tauthority exercising the executive power may follow only if certain<br \/>\n\tcontingencies have resulted. Such a situation would be only as an<br \/>\n\tinterim or a stop gap arrangement, like a caretaker.  The one who is<br \/>\n\tholding the position as caretaker cannot be heard to say that let<br \/>\n\tthere not be a regular election, but a caretaker to remain in power<br \/>\n\tin succession or for indefinite period. If such an attempt is<br \/>\n\tcountenanced by the Court, it would leave room to play fraud with<br \/>\n\tthe democratic principles. The Court in the system of democracy<br \/>\n\twould be zealous to see that the democratic principles are upheld<br \/>\n\tand the power are to remain with those who are genuinely entitled to<br \/>\n\thold due to the mandate of electorate concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThereafter,<br \/>\n\tthe direction was given to hold the election within stipulated time<br \/>\n\tlimit so as to see that the administration is assigned to the<br \/>\n\telected body or the elected representative holding the mandate of<br \/>\n\tthe voters and the power is not continued to be retained by the<br \/>\n\texecutive fiat through the officers of the State Government.  It has<br \/>\n\tbeen declared by Mr.Nanavati, learned Counsel for the petitioner<br \/>\n\tthat view taken by this Court in Vithalbhai Hansrajbhai Radadiya<br \/>\n\t&amp; Ors. v. State of Gujarat &amp; Ors. (supra) is not<br \/>\n\treversed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA, except change<br \/>\n\tin the dates of election.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt<br \/>\n\tappears that the State Government or its officers are not desirous<br \/>\n\tto hold the election in view of the communication dated 1.9.2008.<br \/>\n\tTherefore, the matter can be considered at the later stage at the<br \/>\n\ttime of final hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMr.Jani,<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel appearing for the applicant, vehemently contended<br \/>\n\tthat on account of one reason or another, a stalemate has resulted<br \/>\n\tand, therefore, this Court may allow the Market Committee to take<br \/>\n\tpolicy decision and also for issuance of fresh licence.  In<br \/>\n\tfurtherance to his submission, he contended that there are number of<br \/>\n\ttraders waiting for new licence and on account of the prohibitory<br \/>\n\torder against the policy decision, the construction of the Market<br \/>\n\tCommittee is also put to a grinding halt and the contractor has<br \/>\n\tissued notice and, therefore, considering the facts and<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, this Court may vacate the interim order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAs<br \/>\n\tsuch, as observed earlier, the Secretary of the market Committee is<br \/>\n\tnot representing the Market Committee and as per the Scheme of the<br \/>\n\tAct the powers of the market Committee vest to the Administrator,<br \/>\n\twho did prefer the application for vacating the interim order by<br \/>\n\tpreferring Civil Application No.895 of 2008, which, as observed<br \/>\n\tearlier, was not granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tinterim order, as such, though may not operate as res judicata, but<br \/>\n\twould bind the parties until final conclusion of the proceedings,<br \/>\n\tunless there are extraordinary change in circumstances, which may<br \/>\n\trequire the Court to consider the matter afresh to avoid further<br \/>\n\tcomplication of the issues.  When the question of bifurcation itself<br \/>\n\tis under challenge, by way of interim arrangement the Administrator<br \/>\n\tis assigned with the powers, but if he is prohibited from taking any<br \/>\n\tpolicy decision, the same would, otherwise also, be in the larger<br \/>\n\tinterest of the Market committee and the reason being that if any<br \/>\n\tpolicy decision is taken and at the outcome in the main petition the<br \/>\n\tbifurcation is set aside by this Court, it would create an<br \/>\n\tirreversible situation and third party rights would be created.<br \/>\n\tSimilarly, if the power is exercised for bifurcation of a Market<br \/>\n\tCommittee, so as to create an artificial majority and thereby to<br \/>\n\tcapture the powers, it would be unholy exercise of the powers on the<br \/>\n\tpart of the authorities and also on the part of the Administrator,<br \/>\n\twho steps into the shoes of the elected body during the interregnum<br \/>\n\tperiod.  The approach on the part of the Government not to agree for<br \/>\n\telection, but to insist for permitting policy decision and to assign<br \/>\n\tthe power to the nominated body would run counter to the observance<br \/>\n\tof the principles of democracy in the local self-Government as<br \/>\n\tobserved by this Court in the above referred decision.  This would,<br \/>\n\tprima facie, show that the attempt is to retain the powers, may be<br \/>\n\tunder the guise of the bifurcation of the Market Committee and to<br \/>\n\tassign the powers to the persons, who are having no mandate of the<br \/>\n\tvoters, but may have support of the Government.  Such an attempt<br \/>\n\tcannot be countenanced.  Therefore, this Court at the time when<br \/>\n\tprohibited the grant of fresh licence, intended to maintain the<br \/>\n\tsituation of no further creation of any artificial voters so as to<br \/>\n\thave reflection of the real will of the voters.  Now, merely because<br \/>\n\tsome new voters, may be supporting the bifurcation or otherwise,<br \/>\n\thave come forward for fresh licence would not be the ground for<br \/>\n\tconferring the power, which is expressly prohibited by the earlier<br \/>\n\torder.  Not only that, but if the bifurcation is ultimately set<br \/>\n\taside by this Court, further complication may arise in respect of<br \/>\n\tthe licence granted to new persons and their status as voter at the<br \/>\n\telection of otherwise.   Therefore, it is just and proper to<br \/>\n\tmaintain the same situation by way of a stop-gap and temporary<br \/>\n\tarrangement, until final disposal of main petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHence,<br \/>\n\tit would not be proper to vacate or modify the order.  However,<br \/>\n\tconsidering the facts and circumstances, the main Special Civil<br \/>\n\tApplication be listed for final hearing on 24th<br \/>\n\tSeptember, 2008.  The application is disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<pre>8.9.2008\t\t\t\t\t\t(Jayant\nPatel, J.)\n \n\n\nvinod\n\n    \n\n \n\t   \n      \n      \n\t    \n\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\n\t   \n      \n\t  \t    \n\t\t   Top\n\t   \n      \n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CA\/8746\/2008 6\/ 10 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION &#8211; FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF No. 8746 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6353 of 2007 ========================================================= AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET [&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-172829","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - 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\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-09T08:56:51+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\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-09T08:56:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1490,\"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\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-09T08:56:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - 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\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-09T08:56:51+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\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-09T08:56:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008"},"wordCount":1490,"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\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008","name":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-09T08:56:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-vs-vadodara-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Agricultural vs Vadodara on 8 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/172829","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=172829"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172829\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=172829"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=172829"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=172829"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}