{"id":190050,"date":"2008-02-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008"},"modified":"2016-07-04T07:44:38","modified_gmt":"2016-07-04T02:14:38","slug":"r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 06\/02\/2008\n\nCoram\nTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU\n\nW.P.(MD)No.6306 of 2007\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2007\n\n\nR.Govindaraj\t\t\t\t\t..Petitioner\n\nvs.\n\n1.The Commissioner of Handlooms\n   and Textiles, Chennai - 108.\n\n2.The Joint Director,\n  Handlooms and Textiles,\n  Chennai - 108.\t\t\t\t..Respondents\n\n\n\n\tPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a\nwrit of certiorari, calling for the records relating to the orders passed by the\nfirst respondent in his proceedings in R.C.No.4832\/07\/Q1 dated 04.06.2007\nconfirming the order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in\nR.C.No.23850\/03\/Q1 dated 20.12.2006 and to quash the same.\n\n!For Petitioner \t\t... Mr.A.Thirumurthy\n\n^For Respondents\t\t... Mrs.V.Chellammal, Spl.G.P.\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tThe petitioner is a Handldoom Officer.  During the period between<br \/>\n07.02.2000 and 25.05.2001, he worked as Secretary cum Special officer of Cumbum<br \/>\nNatarajan Handloom Weavers Co-operative Society, Madurai Circle.  During his<br \/>\ntenure as Secretary\/Special Officer in the said society, certain irregularities<br \/>\nwere found out and on that basis, charges were framed against the petitioner<br \/>\nunder Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.<br \/>\nSufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner to defend the said charges.<br \/>\nAn enquiry was also held accordingly.  The Enquiry Officer gave a report to the<br \/>\neffect that the charges stands proved. Based on the said report and after<br \/>\nfollowing the due procedure under law, the Disciplinary Authority has imposed a<br \/>\npunishment of stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect by<br \/>\nthe proceedings of the Joint Director of Handloom, Chennai in R.C.No.23850\/03\/Q-<br \/>\n1 dated 20.12.2006.  The petitioner preferred a statutory appeal against the<br \/>\nsaid order to the Commissioner of Handloom and Textiles, Chennai, who is the<br \/>\nfirst respondent herein.  The first respondent by his proceedings in<br \/>\nR.C.No.4832\/07\/Q1 dated 04.06.2007 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the<br \/>\npunishment imposed on the petitioner by the second respondent.  The petitioner<br \/>\nchallenges the same in this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special<br \/>\nGovernment Pleader appearing for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.  The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that<br \/>\nin respect of the same allegations, an enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Co-operative Societies Act was conducted and on which basis, proceedings<br \/>\nwere initiated under Section 87 of the said Act against the petitioner and other<br \/>\nofficers.  An award was passed directing the petitioner to pay some amount.<br \/>\nChallenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Co-operative<br \/>\nTribunal.  The Tribunal allowed the said appeal and set aside the award made<br \/>\nagainst the petitioner under Section 87 of the Act.  The learned counsel<br \/>\ncontends that since it has been found by the Tribunal that the petitioner is not<br \/>\nguilty in any manner, the charge should be held to be baseless and on that<br \/>\nbasis, the impugned order of punishment is to be set aside.  But I am not able<br \/>\nto persuade myself to agree with the said argument.  The charge in this case<br \/>\nagainst the petitioner is dereliction of duty as he had acted without diligence<br \/>\nand failed to supervise the day to day affairs of the society properly which<br \/>\npaved the way for the other employees of the society to cause loss to the<br \/>\nsociety.  But, a perusal of the records would go to show that in the proceedings<br \/>\ninitiated under Section 87 of the Act, it was alleged that the petitioner acted<br \/>\nin wilful negligence which resulted in the loss.  Of course, a finding was given<br \/>\nby the Deputy Registrar holding that the petitioner was responsible for the loss<br \/>\nto the society and the same was set aside in the appeal by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. A glance at the order of the Tribunal dated 25.04.2005 would go to show<br \/>\nthat the appeal was allowed on the ground that the proceedings under Section 87<br \/>\nof the Act initiated against the petitioner was barred by limitation contained<br \/>\nunder Section 87(2) of the Tamil Nadu Co-Operative Societies Act.  A close<br \/>\nreading of the Judgment of the tribunal would go to show that the Tribunal has<br \/>\nnot given any finding that the petitioner was not guilty of negligence much less<br \/>\nwilful negligence.  Therefore, the fact that the appeal was allowed by the<br \/>\nTribunal on a technical ground of limitation cannot be a ground at all to hold<br \/>\nthat the petitioner was not guilty of the charges in the disciplinary<br \/>\nproceedings initiated against him on the basis of the same allegations.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.\tThere is a basic difference between proceedings initiated under<br \/>\nSection 87 of the Act and the disciplinary proceedings initiated under the<br \/>\nService Rules.  Under Section 87 of the Act, an officer shall be held<br \/>\nresponsible if only it is proved that he is guilty of wilful negligence.  Time<br \/>\nand again, this Court has held that to make an award under Section 87 of the<br \/>\nAct, mere negligence is not suffice, but wilful negligence is required to be<br \/>\nproved. But in the disciplinary proceedings, mere negligence may at times<br \/>\nconstitute misconduct as defined in the Service Rules.  It is thus true that<br \/>\nmere negligence is not suffice to pass an award under Section 87 of the Act, but<br \/>\nit is suffice to punish him in the disciplinary proceedings if it constitutes<br \/>\nmisconduct.  The negligence need not be a wilful negligence in so far as it<br \/>\nrelates to the disciplinary proceedings.  For all these reasons, I am not in a<br \/>\nposition to agree the contenti<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06\/02\/2008 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU W.P.(MD)No.6306 of 2007 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2007 R.Govindaraj ..Petitioner vs. 1.The Commissioner of Handlooms and Textiles, Chennai &#8211; 108. 2.The Joint Director, Handlooms and Textiles, Chennai [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-190050","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 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\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-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=\"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-04T02:14:38+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-04T02:14:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":796,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\",\"name\":\"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-04T02:14:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 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":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 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\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-04T02:14:38+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-04T02:14:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008"},"wordCount":796,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008","name":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-04T02:14:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-govindaraj-vs-the-commissioner-of-handlooms-on-6-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Govindaraj vs The Commissioner Of Handlooms on 6 February, 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\/190050","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=190050"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190050\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190050"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190050"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190050"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}