{"id":194142,"date":"2010-10-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010"},"modified":"2016-10-20T15:20:05","modified_gmt":"2016-10-20T09:50:05","slug":"pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Dave,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/9955\/2010\t 3\/ 6\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 9955 of 2010\n \n\n \n=================================================\n\n\n \n\nPANDIT\nKRUSHNABEN JAGDEEPBHAI - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nMEMBER\nSECRETARY JOINT COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=================================================\n \nAppearance : \nPARTY-IN-PERSON\nfor Petitioner(s) : 1, \nMR PK JANI, GOVT. PLEADER with MS KRINA P\nCALLA, AGP for Respondent(s) :\n1, \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\tTHE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 11\/10\/2010  \nORAL ORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)<\/p>\n<p>\tThis<br \/>\nwrit petition has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on<br \/>\nthe respondent to admit her in Bio Medical Instrumentation &amp;<br \/>\nControl Engineering.  Her grievance was that though she has passed<br \/>\nthe Graduate Aptitude Test for Engineering (hereinafter referred to<br \/>\nas  the GATE ), but she has not been preferred nor admitted.  But<br \/>\nthe persons who have passed Common Entrance Test   2010<br \/>\n(hereinafter referred to as  the CET-2010 ) have been preferred<br \/>\nand admitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner, a young girl aged 26 years, has appeared and addressed<br \/>\nthe Court in person.  She relied on the Professional Post-graduate<br \/>\nCourses (Regulation of Admission and Payment of Fees) (Amendment)<br \/>\nRules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as  the said Rules )<br \/>\npublished by the State Government on 17.7.2010.  At item No. 13 on<br \/>\nAppendix I,  Bio medical Instrumentation  has been shown to be a<br \/>\ncourse\/specialization for the discipline  Bio medical Engineering<br \/>\nfor which B.E.\/B.Tech. in Bio medical Engineering or Bio medical and<br \/>\nInstrumentation Engineering or Instrumentation &amp; Control<br \/>\nEngineering or equivalent qualification have been prescribed.  The<br \/>\npetitioner, being B.E. in Bio medical Engineering thus claims to be<br \/>\neligible for admission in M.E. Bio medical Instrumentation<br \/>\ncourse\/specialization.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tMr<br \/>\nPK Jani, learned Government Pleader appearing alongwith Ms Krina P<br \/>\nCalla, learned AGP on behalf of the respondent referred to Rule 5(a)<br \/>\nof the said Rules and submitted that the person must be qualified in<br \/>\nGATE examination and must have obtained the minimum qualifying marks.<br \/>\n He referred to the GATE 2010 result of the petitioner, wherein 25%<br \/>\nis the minimum qualifying marks shown for general category and it is<br \/>\ninformed that the petitioner only obtained 15.33 marks in the GATE<br \/>\nexamination.  Therefore, according to the respondent, the petitioner,<br \/>\nhaving not obtained the minimum qualifying marks in the GATE 2010<br \/>\nexamination, is not qualified as per Rule 5(a) of the said Rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tPer<br \/>\ncontra, according to the petitioner, 25% marks shown in her result<br \/>\n(GATE 2010 Scorecard) is for availing assistantship governed by the<br \/>\nMinistry of Human Resource Department, Government of India.<br \/>\nAccording to her, 25% qualifying marks is not for passing GATE<br \/>\nexamination.  The petitioner passed the GATE examination and having<br \/>\nher rank shown at Sr. No. 3498, she is entitled for preference over<br \/>\nthose who have passed CET &#8211; 2010 examination.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tFrom<br \/>\nthe advertisement published by the Admission Committee for<br \/>\nProfessional Courses (Technical), Ahmedabad, for admission in the 1st<br \/>\nyear Post Graduate Engineering\/Technology (M.E.\/M.Tech.) Courses :<br \/>\nAcademic year 2010-11, it appears that only after admitting GATE\/GPAT<br \/>\nqualified candidates, the vacant seats shall be filled as per merit<br \/>\nsecured in CET   2010, as evident from Clause 3 of the said<br \/>\nadvertisement as quoted hereunder :-\n<\/p>\n<p> 3.\tAfter<br \/>\nadmitting GATE\/GPAT qualified candidates having valid GATE\/GPAT<br \/>\nmarks, the vacant seats, if any will be filled as per merit secured<br \/>\nin CET   2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn this<br \/>\nbackground, the counsel for the State and its Admission Committee<br \/>\nwere directed to obtain instructions from the Organizing Chairperson,<br \/>\nGATE 2010, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, which had<br \/>\nconducted the GATE 2010 examination, as to what is the minimum<br \/>\nqualifying marks prescribed for passing GATE 2010 examination.  It<br \/>\nwas asked to specifically clarify whether the qualifying marks of 25%<br \/>\nas shown in the scorecard is the qualifying marks for admission or is<br \/>\nthe qualifying marks for availing assistantship governed by the<br \/>\nMinistry of Human Resource Department, Government of India.  It was<br \/>\nspecifically asked that if 25% marks is the qualifying marks for<br \/>\nadmission as shown in the scorecard, then it will enclose the<br \/>\nguideline on the basis of which such marks have been prescribed in<br \/>\nthe scorecard.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tIn the<br \/>\nmeantime, as a prima facie case having made by the petitioner, by<br \/>\ninterim order she has been admitted in M.E. (Bio medical Engineering)<br \/>\ncourse.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe<br \/>\nChairman, GATE-2011, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, by<br \/>\ne-mail has forwarded the opinion to the Member Secretary, Admission<br \/>\nCommittee, Gujarat which reads as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\tOct<br \/>\n5, 2010<\/p>\n<p>To,<\/p>\n<p>Member<br \/>\nSecretary<\/p>\n<p>ACPC,<br \/>\nGujarat.\n<\/p>\n<p>Ref<br \/>\n:\tNo. ACPC\/ME\/2010\/163 dated 1\/10\/2010<\/p>\n<p>Dear<br \/>\nSir\/Madam,<\/p>\n<p>\t1.\tWhat<br \/>\n\tare minimum qualifying marks prescribed for \tpassing GATE ?\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\nGATE 2010 there is no concept of passing or failing in the<br \/>\nexamination.  Every candidate taking the GATE 2010 examination will<br \/>\nget a score and scorecard.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tWhether<br \/>\nqualifying marks of 25% as shown in scorecard is for admission for<br \/>\navailing assistantship only ?\n<\/p>\n<p>Yes,<br \/>\nprecisely.  This is for general category and other categories have<br \/>\nconcession as per GOI rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tWhat<br \/>\nthe minimum marks that make candidate to be eligible as a GATE<br \/>\nqualified candidate ?\n<\/p>\n<p>There<br \/>\nis nothing like qualified or non-qualified.  It is like a GRE exam of<br \/>\nUSA where every person taking GATE 2010 exam will get a scorecard<br \/>\naccording to her\/his performance.\n<\/p>\n<p>Min<br \/>\nof 25% is kept as qualifying mark only to avail assistantship.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFinal<br \/>\nComment :\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\neligibility criteria for admitting candidates to PG course lies with<br \/>\nthe admitting body or the institute.  Please refer to GATE 2010<br \/>\nInformation Brochure or GATA 2010 Website.  In page 5 of 44 GATE 2010<br \/>\ninformation brochure, under section 2 we have clearly mentioned that<br \/>\nGATE committee is not responsible for giving any guidelines in this<br \/>\nregard.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sincerely,<\/p>\n<p>prasanna<\/p>\n<p>Dr.\n<\/p>\n<p>S.R.M. Prasanna<\/p>\n<p>Chairman,<br \/>\nGATE   2011<\/p>\n<p>Indian<br \/>\nInstitute of Technology Guwahati<\/p>\n<p>Guwahati<br \/>\n0 781 039<\/p>\n<p>ASSAM,<br \/>\nINDIA.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tFrom<br \/>\nthe GATE 2010 Scorecard of the petitioner, we find the qualifying<br \/>\nmark that has been shown which reads as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\tGeneral<br \/>\n(GN)\tOBC\t\tSC\/ST\/PD<\/p>\n<p>\tQualifying<br \/>\nmark* :       25.00              22.50              16.67<\/p>\n<p>*<br \/>\nA candidate is considered<br \/>\neligible for availing assistantship governed by MHRD, GOF if the<br \/>\nmarks secured are more than or equal to the qualifying mark in the<br \/>\ncategory under which the candidate seek admission.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\nresponsibility of determining the category of the candidate for<br \/>\nadmission and assistantship eligibility lies with the admitting<br \/>\ninstitute.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFrom<br \/>\nthe explanation below the qualifying mark, it will be evident that<br \/>\nthe qualifying marks prescribed therein is meant for availing<br \/>\nassistantship governed by the Ministry of Human Resource Department,<br \/>\nGovernment of India and it does not prescribe any qualifying marks<br \/>\nfor clearing GATE examination.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tFrom the<br \/>\nclarification given by the Chairman, GATE   2011 by e-mail dated<br \/>\n5.10.2010 also, it will be evident that there is no minimum<br \/>\nqualifying marks prescribed for any GATE examination.  The qualifying<br \/>\nmark of 25% as shown in the scorecard is for general and other<br \/>\ncategories shown as per the Government of India Rules i.e. for grant<br \/>\nof assistantship.   In view of the aforesaid clarification and the<br \/>\nexplanation as shown below the qualifying marks shown in the GATE<br \/>\n2010 Scorecard, we hold that the respondent cannot deprive the<br \/>\npetitioner from admitting in M.E.\/M.Tech. Engineering course in the<br \/>\nsubject concerned on the ground that she has not obtained 25% in the<br \/>\nGATE examination.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFurther, in<br \/>\nview of Clause 3 of the advertisement notice published by the<br \/>\nAdmission Committee for Professional Courses (Technical), Ahmedabad<br \/>\nas quoted hereinabove, we further hold that the petitioner having<br \/>\nranked at 3498 in the GATE examination, ought to have been preferred<br \/>\nover those who have qualified in the CET   2010 examination.  The<br \/>\nrespondent having admitted students in the M.E\/M.Tech. in Bio medical<br \/>\nEngineering Course out of the candidates who have passed CET   2010<br \/>\nexamination, it was incumbent on them to admit the petitioner prior<br \/>\nto their admission.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner having passed B.E. (Bio medical &amp; Instrumentation<br \/>\nEngineering), as per the prospectus of the respondent and the<br \/>\nadvertisement, she was eligible for the admission in M.E.\/M.Tech.  in<br \/>\nBio medical Engineering Course.  Thus, the provisional admission<br \/>\ngiven to the petitioner by the respondent pursuant to the order of<br \/>\nthis Court is made absolute.   The respondent is directed to allow<br \/>\nthe petitioner to continue in M.E. in Bio medical Engineering course<br \/>\n2010-11 and also allow her to<br \/>\nappear in the forthcoming examination.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tThe writ<br \/>\npetition is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions.<br \/>\nNo costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tDirect Service<br \/>\nis permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[S.J.\n<\/p>\n<p>MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.]<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[ANANT<br \/>\nS. DAVE, J.]<\/p>\n<p>sundar\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Dave,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/9955\/2010 3\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9955 of 2010 ================================================= PANDIT KRUSHNABEN JAGDEEPBHAI &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus MEMBER SECRETARY JOINT COMMITTEE FOR ADMISSION &#8211; Respondent(s) [&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-194142","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - 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\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-20T09:50:05+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-20T09:50:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1312,\"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\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-20T09:50:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - 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\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-20T09:50:05+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-20T09:50:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010"},"wordCount":1312,"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\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010","name":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-20T09:50:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pandit-vs-member-on-11-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pandit vs Member on 11 October, 2010"}]},{"@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\/194142","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=194142"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/194142\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=194142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=194142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=194142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}