{"id":187962,"date":"2008-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008"},"modified":"2016-03-11T18:15:52","modified_gmt":"2016-03-11T12:45:52","slug":"north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer<\/div>\n
 \n\nu  = :  maria.\n k   (By Sri Ashok Patil, Adv.)\n\nmen COURT or KARNATAKA H\nlG|-4 COHRT or KARNATAKA HI\n\n,- .A GH coum o|= KARNATAKA meg\n\n   COURT or Kmm\n\nATAKA men COURT or: KARNATAKA man\n\n \n\n \n\nIN THE HXGH COURT OF KARNATAKA   \n\ncmcvrr BENCHAT GULBARGA ~ A\n\nDATED THIS THE 25\"' DAY OF NOVEME\ufb02 {   *  ' Q\n\nBmvomg\n\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE  JABDUL. \u00ab % AI  k   \n\nWRIT PEr1T1oN%;i\\r0.12s6s,liar,\" __\n\nReptcl By its Chiet'\u00abLaw\"\n\n Petitioner.\n\n 3:1 Shivmkggn\u00e9r S} B\u00e9dawadag', Adv.)\n\nA &g ;\n\n%WwmmM%;\n' , Sic I\\?_Ius'ta'I.._'3x'Sab,\n\nAges!  56 years,\n\nN(:,2A-2-92, Androon Khilla,\n Respondent.<\/pre>\n
-… .,.. m…W.  .,w_um. LII” mu-.~m.nm :-mm c.-uuxr or KARNATAKA HiGH comm OF KARNATAKA HiGi-! couar or KARNATAKA HIGH
\n% .\n<\/p>\n
W.P.N0.1 21 77\/2005<\/p>\n
Between:\n<\/p>\n
Road ‘Tit C%ion,
\nRaichur Division,<\/p>\n
Raichur,<\/p>\n
By its Divisional Controller,
\nReptd. By its Chief Law Of\ufb01cer.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
(By Sri Slnivalaxmar s.    ' % \u00ab _  \n\nAnd:\n\nS\/0   \"  V\nAged aVbout.45'3Iear\u00a7,i:;_  ~\nSirawarPost, M  -4 '\nRaiohur District. '   \n\n(By S:;..P._ vifas  Ami)\u00bb\nH\/.P.N0.12090\/7005\n\n T 'Raicthur Division,\n.   Rggchm,\n<\/pre>\n
 \u00bb. gay its Divisional Corxtmiier,<\/p>\n
  Reptd. By1’tsChiefLawO\ufb01ieer.\n<\/p>\n
(By Sri Shivaknmar S. Badawadagi, Adv.)<\/p>\n
. Respondent.\n<\/p>\n
. . .. Petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
vs nu-nu no-nu-un.r-I I II\\.’n I \\.-\\I\\Jl\\l \\ll’ I\\r\\l\\lV.f’iII”‘\\l’\\I’\\ nu.-.vrI LLVUKI U!’       i<\/p>\n
and when the bus was stopped near the Bank  <\/p>\n
waiting for the Security Guard and the
\nalighted from the bus with the cash tx11nI_<._.g.5,:0.iI:1"g.:t0<–A<\/p>\n
the bank and thereby you  in e:A'ne.g\ufb01.gent  'V <\/p>\n
leading to the robbery of the  '<\/p>\n
The Security Guard was  with a  eeee, which is
\nas under: A t 3 A Z<\/p>\n
"Yeiz'_I?i%tcl4 the  the depot on
\n23.1i5,:9\u00e9;:.tQ\u00a7'vte\u00a7i:itteii\u00a3:e.'ef–tt2e eeieent to the Bank and
\neiatt"ti:-aetA::fi?et1   the uniform and
\nfailed :5 me also did not protest when
\nthe robbefe._etta,c1\u00a7ed   and thereby failed to
\ntake Adiligent\u00e9beteges te.e'prevei1t.t11e robbery and acted in\n<\/p>\n
  –  _  e..;-esult of which the Corporation
\n \u00bb f\u00a7\ufb01101jIii.,t)f__lakhS came to be robbed.”<\/p>\n
Sirnt_Iarlyi  was served with 3 charge sheet, which<\/p>\n
‘ ‘ ” ” -fi\u00e9i’  ‘under: a<\/p>\n
-u -u-aquariu-\n<\/p>\n
   23.12.96 you committed serious irregularity in<\/p>\n
handing over the cash trunk to the Attender to carry it
\nto the bank and so also, you failed to raise any voice to
\nattract the public when the robbers attacked the
\nAtiender and robbed the cash trunk and thereby acted<\/p>\n
in negligent manner resulting in the robher3}V:”‘of~….,
\nCorporation amount ofRs.2.4 lakhs.”  ”<\/p>\n
5. The charges were proved
\nbasis of which the Corporation “the  >
\nservice. This dismissal gave    and the
\nrespondents \ufb01led app1icat?.ons’_V:h  1(r(4eA) of the
\nIndustrial Disputes Act  The Corporation
\nrelied upon ‘ the respondents
\nand   the enquiry con\ufb01leted by
\n   the validity of the enquiry. The<\/p>\n
Labour Cant   not fair and proper. The<\/p>\n
parties were” given  to lead their evidence in regard to<\/p>\n
   alieged against them. On consideration of the<\/p>\n
 i  parties, the Labour Court held that the<\/p>\n
 V V eharges were v–:iot’p:roved. Consequently, the Labour Court directed<\/p>\n
W the respondents to the post held by them with \ufb01zll<\/p>\n
  continuity of service and all other consequential<\/p>\n
  s  n _ ‘ <\/p>\n
HIGH LUUKT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNIWAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA I-HGH C<\/p>\n
6. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.<\/p>\n
aIr-II\\I1l-\\I.l’ll!\ufb02”’I : lI\\lI I \\–\\.JlJl\\I LII’ i\\P\\l\u00a7I’I-|l.F\\I\\l”\\ I”\ufb02\\3I””I LQUKE U!’       Q<\/p>\n
7. Learned Counsel for the  ” .\n<\/p>\n
contend that the Labour Court was not\u00bbrj1.!s_tifA:iecii  the 2
\ncharges have not been proved. It is    <\/p>\n
iet in evidence of one  ‘Vigilanceiei<\/p>\n
Officer working with  ihe’re1evei1t point of
\ntime. The respoaadexiteiieve  \ufb01zeir evidence, and
\ndocuments hauvejibeen  It is argued ma:\n<\/p>\n
without    in its proper
\n  that the charges have not
\nbeen iprove\u00e9d.  “\ufb01e argued that the Labour Court was
\nnot justiiie\ufb01   wagw. It is suhmittw that ajter<\/p>\n
 of  . dieeripihzary authority, the respondents were<\/p>\n
‘   service and pursuant to an interim order passed by<\/p>\n
H  were reinstatw subject to the result of the writ<\/p>\n
ffherefore, the Labour Court could not have awarded full<\/p>\n
2 ~   weges.\n<\/p>\n
8. On the other hand, learned Advocates appearing for the
\nrespondents sought to justify the impugned award of the Labour
\nCourt. Itis arguedthatinsoferasthe Attenderis oomemed, the<\/p>\n
in<\/p>\n
C<\/p>\n
back wages with continuity of service and all other <\/p>\n
bene\ufb01ts.\n<\/p>\n
9. I have carei\ufb01zlly  “the<\/p>\n
learned Counsel at the Bar   znaietielev\u00e9pieced <\/p>\n
record<\/p>\n
10. The ehazfges    have been
\nculled out   authority
\nhas   and the respondents
\nwere __ Eiowever, the Labour Conn found<\/p>\n
that the   the respondents was not<\/p>\n
fair and pgjppen ‘I11erefoffe,v’theV:parties were pennimt to lead their<\/p>\n
  En’ to substantiate the charges, the Security<\/p>\n
  as M.W1. He has stated that<\/p>\n
 Oi:mne<i1'a1eO""!y  happening ofthe aforesaid incident, he has<\/p>\n
    spot end has recorded the statements ofthe respondents<\/p>\n
 o_s_~al\u00e9o:t1:e' driver ofthe bus belonging to the Corporation in which<\/p>\n
O   had travelled from the office oftlme Corporation to<\/p>\n
 Bank in questioo. He has 1101 reoord\ufb01 the statements of any<\/p>\n
mu:-I QUURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH QGLJRT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C<\/p>\n
other person, who had witnessed the incident. Admittedly, he was<\/p>\n
$2<\/p>\n
I\u00a7\\.e'I<\/p>\n
, \\.a\\JlJ!\\l ….- "….\u00bb…..m.\\… near': i..w;a. Ur mm.-amm mt.-m uuuau or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HEGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH ca<\/p>\n
not an eye witness to the incident. The <\/p>\n
respondents were marked in evidence.<\/p>\n
11. The allegatiom against the   he <\/p>\n
from the bus with the cash 1,,’ \u00bbr.,t:l\u00a7riithcuil’w:*\u00a5’lil*’e%l  ‘seguny <\/p>\n
guard and the cashier. ‘I’h”e gaid  feunil tdbeliaseless by
\nthe Labour Court. It is    there is an attack
\nby culprits   unarmed and
\nuntrained   to expect him to react in
\nthe   for the respondents in
\nthe    Security Guard is concerned,<\/p>\n
the allegaiiiml is that  not wearing the uniform or was not<\/p>\n
;_’jIiOl-fling at  the attention ofthe public. The<\/p>\n
  the said charge is that of M.W1. It is
\n  MW1 has not smtad that the Security
\n.  was  uniform, he had stated that he had not carried
\n. 7   supplied and he failed to take the preventive measures
\n    to follow the procedure. It is not suggested to the
\n Guard that he was not in uniform at the time of the
\n incident. It is also not suggested to him that though iathi was<\/p>\n
supplied to him, he had not carried it, Therefore, the said allegation<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
.<.;;"m…g
\n%<\/p>\n
made against the Security Guard is also haselsss. <\/p>\n
charges levelled against the Cashier, the   <\/p>\n
produced any circular to the effect    ii " ii<\/p>\n
to be made by the Cashier by  :g<:i1igit'o. <\/p>\n
and he should personally  h\u00e9\u00e9nd\u00e9i dc$i\u00a3\u00a7'\u00a3':g\u00ab–w\u00a2i\u00a7u \u00e9rf A<\/p>\n
the box in which money is   was
\nexamined as w.w1. He  lieginning, he used
\nto take Attender and  of the amount
\nand the    {log being hmvy. This
\nsugwtion   Coming to the
\n    O the Security Guard and the
\nCashier   any efforts to avoid when the
\ncuxprgs foximlibery, tm Corporation has relied on<\/p>\n
 . <ifM.W1.  noticed above, M.Wi was not a witnew<\/p>\n
    Labour Court on proper appreciation of the<\/p>\n
 L mat\u00e9rial   has recorded a \ufb01nding of fact that the<\/p>\n
T i' were not negligent. The said \ufb01nding of fad is on the<\/p>\n
A   proper appreciation of the material on record, and there is<\/p>\n
  = zzoiaervexsity, illegality or irregularity in those \ufb01miing. I am of the<\/p>\n
 T " iview that the said \ufb01ndings offad does not call for izlterference.<\/p>\n
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH_CIO_;URT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATA<\/p>\n
K\u00bb<\/p>\n
s<\/p>\n
12. The second question for consideration is <\/p>\n
Labour Court is right in awarding am back wages? meet;  <\/p>\n
that the award of back wages is no longe;  K ”<\/p>\n
natural consequence of reinstatement.   <\/p>\n
formula can be laid down as to  what  ‘pitgtrnetlt ‘~ . L’<\/p>\n
of entire back wages should be  the facts
\nand circumstances of      which has to
\nbe taken into”    service that the
\nemployee   the  ttamre of service, mode
\nand  employee has rendered a
\neonsiderableivtypel-\u00a79’d   “services were wrongfully<\/p>\n
termma1ed’ , he be    panial back wages keeping<\/p>\n
 yiew  tlf1atV.af’la.-is,__i\u00a2\u00bb_g\u00a2.\u20ac and the quali\ufb01cation processed by<\/p>\n
 l:1e’;nay-got Alina position to get another employment. The<\/p>\n
 A  _ Am\u00e9reaua   MANAGER, HARYANA ROADWAYS<\/p>\n
 y Vs, RU1\u00a7HA}\u00a7f.SIl\\TGH –. (2095) 5 sec 591, was considering the<\/p>\n
‘ =   of baek wages to a Workman under the Industrial Disputes<\/p>\n
   held as under:\n<\/p>\n
 ..-…… ..,. !\\I”\\I\\l’\u00a21″lIl”\\_l\\l’| nluri ..__…_o.u ur mmmnm mutt Luuiu or mmawm HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA men c<\/p>\n
“8. There is no rule of thumb that in every case where
\nthe Industrial Tribunal give: a \ufb01nding that the<\/p>\n
ll<\/p>\n
2′<\/p>\n
. -., ….. .. …1………….,.. .-….m coon. vr nnmwuui-\\a\\A r-ms:-1 cuum or KARNATAKA men COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH comer or KARNATAKA Hie:-E\u00e9
\nl<\/p>\n
ta. f<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
termination of service was in violation of Section: A’
\nof the Act, entire back wages should be
\nhost of factors like the manner and   iv
\nand appointment, i.e., \\=;hethci’\u00ab ._
\nadvertisement of the vacancy elf ;.l\u00a7vitillg
\nam the en3ploy1ilei1_t’excltanVg–e,V  “of<\/p>\n
appointment, namely,
\nwage, teznplyl-awn’ .91.   any
\nspecial quazi\ufb01caeginiljeecland the like
\nshould be .weigl1ed”ai;’;d:’tve]a;ice;i   a decision
\nof we wag\u00a2s.mee:e the important
\nfactote,  lees tci’\ufb01i:ev’tel(ieaav’i1titc’considexa1iozi, is the<\/p>\n
 e\u00e9tj\u00a7iice;–.:iwhicli  had rendered
\n:\\_With* the’*”e;ti;iloyei*._\ufb01If._the workman has rendered a<\/p>\n
cc.2,1_sidei’ab_ ” Vl\ufb01ii  “eervice and his services are<\/p>\n
V e _   he may be awarded \ufb01ill or<\/p>\n
~  ;\u00a7aaia.:   keeping in View the fact that at his<\/p>\n
_  tlie quali\ufb01cation possessed by him he may not<\/p>\n
it –    to get ano\ufb02zer employment. However,<\/p>\n
 the total length of service rendered by a<\/p>\n
 ,.  is very small, the award of back wages for<\/p>\n
 complete period, i.e., \ufb01om the date of termination<\/p>\n
 till the date of the award, which our experience shows<\/p>\n
is often quite large, would be Wholly
\nAnother important factor, which requires to be taken
\ninto consideration is the nature of employment. A
\nregular service of permanent character camiot be
\ncompared to short or intermittent daily wage<\/p>\n
K’.\n<\/p>\n
1%\u00bb. –\n<\/p>\n
v-\n<\/p>\n
employment though it may be for 240 days
\nealendaryear.” ”   ‘<\/p>\n
In TALWARA coopzzeqnft\/Eohhdelszoiir’ <\/p>\n
SOCIETY LTD. VS. SUSHIL V.E;’.![1}1,=1I?-.— ‘A112   A  8.<\/p>\n
the Apex Court has held as under:    M<\/p>\n
“”11. Great of a reliefof 1t.iV\u00bbVie”trite, is not
\nautomatic’.   ‘(is not automatic.\n<\/p>\n
The    their power
\nunder Disputes Act, 1947<\/p>\n
 are 1eq=u;:\u00a2a…;o..sna:;e. mm in a. situation of this
\n   certain relevant factors as
\nfor ~:_1ata.1te’oi’ service, the mode and manner<\/p>\n
V.  ‘vof~f6C!11i1Ill\u00ab’$VI11.  whether the appointment had been<\/p>\n
 8   with the statutory rules so far as a
\n8  —  Lmdertaking is coneemed etc., should be<\/p>\n
9?\n<\/p>\n
takei: :\u00a7.mb consideration ……………… ..<\/p>\n
13. In this case, respondents were appointed to their<\/p>\n
8 ‘gfes\u00a7;ective posts on 18.1.1982, 12.1.1981 and 6.5.1987 respectiveiy.<\/p>\n
 ”  is not the case of the Corpmatioa that earlier to the date of<\/p>\n
man -uum ur mu-uunnn mun oupm ur mammmsn mun-s COURT or KARINEATAKA HEGH COURT op KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA men c<\/p>\n
incident, they had committed any misconduct. The Labour Court<\/p>\n
on proper apprwiation of the facts and circumstances of the case<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
C<\/p>\n
 “”‘”” V’ “”‘”‘”‘**M mun uuunu Ur mxmnznm I-HGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH co
\n .: URT or KARNATAKA I-HGH COURT or KARNATAKA
\n\u00ab .\u00ab HIGH 4:\n<\/p>\n
ex<\/p>\n
wages, continuity of service and all other consequential benefzts\u00bb
\nHaving regard to the facts and circumstances of the ca\u00a7’e;–    <\/p>\n
LahourCourtwas rigzt in gaming full bad: wages.    ”<\/p>\n
ofservioe and otherconsequemial bene\ufb01ts<\/p>\n
14. Inthe result, them is :19 meitjza
\nthey are accordingly dismissed      V  _
\n  ‘ I udge<\/p>\n
BMMl251l2GUr8  ”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 Author: S.Abdul Nazeer u = : maria. k (By Sri Ashok Patil, Adv.) men COURT or KARNATAKA H lG|-4 COHRT or KARNATAKA HI ,- .A GH coum o|= KARNATAKA meg COURT or Kmm ATAKA men COURT or: KARNATAKA man IN […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187962","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNorth East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - 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\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"North East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-11T12:45:52+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\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-11T12:45:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1902,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\",\"name\":\"North East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-11T12:45:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 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":"North East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - 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\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"North East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-11T12:45:52+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\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-11T12:45:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008"},"wordCount":1902,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008","name":"North East Karnataka Road ... vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-11T12:45:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/north-east-karnataka-road-vs-nayeem-miya-on-25-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"North East Karnataka Road … vs Nayeem Miya on 25 November, 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\/187962","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=187962"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187962\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187962"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187962"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187962"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}