{"id":173488,"date":"2009-06-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009"},"modified":"2018-04-11T05:22:55","modified_gmt":"2018-04-10T23:52:55","slug":"tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP.No. 28454 of 2002(K)\n\n\n1. TAPIOCA PRODUCTS GLUCOSE EMPLOYEES\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. PRABHAKARAN, CHIRACKAL THRIVENI\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SMT.PREETHI KESAVAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR (SR.)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN\n\n Dated :10\/06\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                        V.K.MOHANAN, J.\n              ---------------------------------------------\n                  O.P.No. 28454 of 2002 - K\n              ---------------------------------------------\n              Dated this the 10th day of June, 2009\n\n                         J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
             The first petitioner is a trade union representing<\/p>\n
the workers of M\/s.Tapioca Products, Chalakkudy and the<\/p>\n
second petitioner is the member of the union and an<\/p>\n
employee of the said establishment. The employees of the<\/p>\n
above establishment were covered by the Employees’<\/p>\n
Provident Fund Scheme. According to the petitioners, serious<\/p>\n
errors were committed by the respondents while computing<\/p>\n
the pensionary benefits and therefore, they approached this<\/p>\n
Court by filing O.P.No.37162 of 2001 which was disposed of<\/p>\n
by Ext.P1 judgment by which the respondent was directed to<\/p>\n
consider the matter again and to pass fresh orders. Ext.P2 is<\/p>\n
the order thus passed.\n<\/p>\n
       2.    Now the grievance of the petitioner is that no<\/p>\n
effective opportunity was given to the petitioners to present<\/p>\n
their claims and case though there was a direction in Ext.P1<\/p>\n
judgment to hear the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners<\/p>\n
have preferred this writ petition with a prayer to quash Ext.P2<\/p>\n
and hold that the members of the first petitioner-Union are<\/p>\n
OP NO.28454 of 2002<\/p>\n
                                :-2-:\n<\/p>\n
entitled to their pension refixed in accordance with the scheme<\/p>\n
formulated    under   the   Employees’   Provident   Funds      and<\/p>\n
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. It is also prayed for issuing<\/p>\n
a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to reconsider the<\/p>\n
issue of pensionary benefits to the members of the first petitioner-<\/p>\n
union in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
       3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well<\/p>\n
as the Standing Counsel for the respondents. A statement is<\/p>\n
seen filed on behalf of the respondents.<\/p>\n
       4. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition<\/p>\n
is to the effect that though as per Ext.P1 judgment, the<\/p>\n
respondent was directed to consider the matter afresh and give<\/p>\n
opportunity to the petitioners, such opportunity was not given.<\/p>\n
According to the petitioners, the union representatives were not<\/p>\n
aware of the procedure and the materials to be considered for the<\/p>\n
purpose of calculation and they sought permission to engage a<\/p>\n
lawyer. But, the officer, who heard the matter in a hasty manner,<\/p>\n
disposed of the matter and the representatives were not in a<\/p>\n
position to follow the measures adopted by the officer in<\/p>\n
calculating the monthly pension.\n<\/p>\n
OP NO.28454 of 2002<\/p>\n
                                  :-3-:\n<\/p>\n
      5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as<\/p>\n
directed by this Court in Ext.P1 judgment, a competent officer has<\/p>\n
passed Ext.P2 order after hearing the petitioners and it is also the<\/p>\n
case of the counsel that going by Ext.P2, it can be seen as to<\/p>\n
how the monthly pension was fixed by the officer.<\/p>\n
      6.   I am not proposed to go into the merits or demerits of<\/p>\n
the case as the main grievance of the petitioner is that they were<\/p>\n
not given an effective opportunity to present their case. It is true<\/p>\n
that the workers or their representatives may not be aware of the<\/p>\n
entire details and the mode of calculation for fixing the monthly<\/p>\n
pension and therefore, it was only proper for the respondent to<\/p>\n
allow the prayer of the petitioners to engage a lawyer during the<\/p>\n
hearing of the matter as directed by Ext.P1 judgment. Therefore,<\/p>\n
I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the<\/p>\n
respondent to reconsider the matter and pass fresh orders after<\/p>\n
hearing the petitioners and their representatives.<\/p>\n
         In the result, this writ petition is disposed of directing the<\/p>\n
respondent to reconsider the matter, by giving an effective<\/p>\n
opportunity to the petitioners by permitting them to engage a<\/p>\n
lawyer or any representative according to their choice at the time<\/p>\n
of hearing and the respondent is further directed to pass fresh<\/p>\n
OP NO.28454 of 2002<\/p>\n
                              :-4-:\n<\/p>\n
orders and for enabling the respondent to pass appropriate<\/p>\n
orders, Ext.P2 is quashed. The petitioner is directed to produce a<\/p>\n
copy of this judgment before the respondent within one month<\/p>\n
from today and the respondent is directed to dispose of the<\/p>\n
matter within three months thereafter.<\/p>\n
                                         V.K.Mohanan,
\n                                              Judge<\/p>\n
MBS\/<\/p>\n
OP NO.28454 of 2002<\/p>\n
                       :-5-:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                     V.K.MOHANAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
                       ——————————————–<\/p>\n
                                O.P.NO. 28454 OF 2002\n<\/p>\n
                        ——————————————–<\/p>\n
                                  J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
                               DATED: 10-6-2009<\/p>\n
OP NO.28454 of 2002<\/p>\n
                       :-6-:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP.No. 28454 of 2002(K) 1. TAPIOCA PRODUCTS GLUCOSE EMPLOYEES … Petitioner 2. PRABHAKARAN, CHIRACKAL THRIVENI Vs 1. EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION … Respondent For Petitioner :SMT.PREETHI KESAVAN For Respondent :SRI.S.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-173488","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nTapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-10T23:52:55+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-10T23:52:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":706,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Tapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-10T23:52:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Tapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-10T23:52:55+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-10T23:52:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009"},"wordCount":706,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009","name":"Tapioca Products Glucose ... vs Employees' Provident Fund ... on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-10T23:52:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tapioca-products-glucose-vs-employees-provident-fund-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tapioca Products Glucose … vs Employees’ Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009"}]},{"@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\/173488","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=173488"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173488\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173488"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173488"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173488"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}