{"id":217221,"date":"2007-06-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-06-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007"},"modified":"2014-12-31T07:56:03","modified_gmt":"2014-12-31T02:26:03","slug":"the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","title":{"rendered":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 15\/06\/2007\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU\n\nW.P.(MD)No.3547 of 2004\n\nThe Management\nElumalai Primary Agricultural\nCo-operative Bank, Elumalai,\nPeraiyur(TK) Madurai District,\nthrough its Special officer,\t...\tPetitioner \t\t\t\n\nVs.\t\n\n1.The Appellate Authority\n  under the Tamil Nadu Shops and\n  Establishments Act,\n  (The Deputy Commissioner of Labour),\n  Sundaram, Theatre Road, K.K.Nagar,\n  Madurai - 625 020.\n\n2.S.Subramanian\t\t\t...\tRespondents\n\n\nPRAYER\n\n\nWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,\npraying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the\n1st respondent in  his filed T.N.S.E.No.29\/02 and quash the impugned order of\nthe 1st respondent Dt.18.02.2004.\n\n!For Petitioner   \t... Mr.S.Seenivasagam\n\n^For 1st respondent\t... Mrs.V.Chellammal,\n\t\t\t    Spl.Government Pleader.\n\nFor 2nd respondent  \t... No appearance\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tThe petitioner is a Cooperative Bank. Challenging the order passed<br \/>\nby the first appellate authority in TNSE No.29\/2002 dated 18.02.2004, has come<br \/>\nforward with this petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t    2. The ground for setting aside the order of dismissal in the impugned<br \/>\norder is that the petitioner has not given due opportunity to the 2nd respondent<br \/>\nin the conduct of the enquiry and therefore, the domestic enquiry was not<br \/>\nproperly conducted. On that ground, the appeal was allowed by order dated<br \/>\n18.02.2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t  3. Mr.S.Seenivasagam, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the<br \/>\nfinding rendered by the appellate authority is totally illegal and even assuming<br \/>\nthat the enquiry was not conducted properly, he is eligible to let in additional<br \/>\nevidence and therefore, the order suffers from material irregularity.\n<\/p>\n<p> \t\t4. When questioned whether in the pleadings filed  before the lower<br \/>\nauthority  any request to let in additional evidence was made, the learned<br \/>\ncounsel points out to the counter statement filed by the petitioner&#8217;s Management<br \/>\nbefore the authority.  The copy of which is also filed in the typedset of papers<br \/>\nof the present writ petition.  In the counter statement dated  2nd October, the<br \/>\npetitioner in paragraph 11 has clearly stated that if the authority finds that<br \/>\nthe enquiry was not conducted properly, then the petitioner\/Management may be<br \/>\npermitted to let in additional evidence to justify their action.  Unfortunately,<br \/>\nthe first respondent, appellate authority has not considered his request made in<br \/>\nthe pleadings filed before him.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t5. The Honourable Supreme Court in the Judgment reported in 1997 (2)<br \/>\nLLN 73 (United Planters Association of Southern India Vs.  K.G.Sangameswaran and<br \/>\nanother)  held in an identical case and interpreted the provision of Section 41<br \/>\nof the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act and held in paragraph 19 which<br \/>\nreads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;19. From a perusal of the provisions quoted above, it will be seen that<br \/>\nthe jurisdiction of the appellate authority to record evidence and to come to<br \/>\nits own conclusion on the questions involved in the appeal is very wide.  Even<br \/>\nif the evidence is recorded in the domestic enquiry and the order of dismissal<br \/>\nis passed thereafter, it will still be open to the appellate authority to<br \/>\nrecord, if need be, such evidence as may be produced by the parties.<br \/>\nConversely, also if the domestic enquiry is ex parte or no evidence was recorded<br \/>\nduring those proceedings, the appellate authority would still be justified in<br \/>\ntaking additional evidence to enable it to come to its own conclusions on the<br \/>\narticles of charges framed against the delinquent officer.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAfter stating so in the passage quoted above, in paragraph 26 the<br \/>\nHonourable Supreme Court&#8217;s further observed as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t&#8220;If the instant case is analysed in the light of the principles laid<br \/>\ndown above, it will be noticed that the appellate authority has interfered with<br \/>\nthe order of discharge\/dismissal of the respondent on the ground only that a<br \/>\ndomestic enquiry was not held into the imputations made against the respondent.<br \/>\nIt did not decide the application of the appellant for recording evidence.  The<br \/>\nappellate authority, therefore, committed grave error in the exercise of its<br \/>\njurisdiction by not disposing of the application of the appellant for additional<br \/>\nevidence and proceedings to dispose of the appeal on the ground that the order<br \/>\nof dismissal having been passed without holding a domestic enquiry, was bad in<br \/>\nlaw.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tFinally, the Apex Court set aside the order of the appellate<br \/>\nauthority as well as the Judgment of High Court and directed the appellate<br \/>\nauthority to dispose of the appeal filed under Section 41 of the Act, in<br \/>\naccordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t 6. In the light of the same, the petitioner is entitled to succeed<br \/>\nin this writ petition.  However, in the present case, since the petition has<br \/>\nbeen filed, the petitioner is succeeding only on the ground that no opportunity<br \/>\nwas given, this Court is not going into the issue whether the findings given in<br \/>\nthe impugned order regarding the validity of the enquiry are correct or not, as<br \/>\nthere is ample opportunity for the petitioner\/Management to agitate that issue<br \/>\nat a later point of time.  Therefore, the order dated 18.2.2004 is only treated<br \/>\nas a preliminary order, giving full liberty to the petitioner to re-agitate the<br \/>\nmatter on merits.  If they are unable to succeed, it is needless to say that the<br \/>\norder of preliminary nature gets merged with final order and the petitioner can<br \/>\nalso agitate he same issue before this Court at the appropriate time.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t7. Under these circumstances, without disturbing the findings<br \/>\nrendered by the first respondent authority and treating it as a preliminary<br \/>\norder, this Court hereby directs the first respondent to reopen Tamilnadu Shops<br \/>\nand Establishment Appeal made in T.N.S.E.A.No.29 of 2002 and allow the<br \/>\npetitioner Management to let in evidence to justify their action as prayed by<br \/>\nthem in the counter statement and proceed to deal with the merits of the said<br \/>\ncase,  after notice to the second respondent and pass appropriate  orders on the<br \/>\nmerits of the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t8. The writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.<br \/>\nAs and when the appellate authority passes an order, liberty is to be allowed to<br \/>\nbe retained by the  petitioner Management to agitate both the final order as<br \/>\nwell as the preliminary order.   Since the matter is of the year 2002, the first<br \/>\nrespondent is directed to dispose of the said appeal within a period of three<br \/>\nmonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving due notice<br \/>\nto both the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe Appellate Authority<br \/>\n under the Tamil Nadu Shops and<br \/>\n Establishments Act,<br \/>\n (The Deputy Commissioner of Labour),<br \/>\n Sundaram, Theatre Road, K.K.Nagar,<br \/>\n Madurai &#8211; 625 020.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15\/06\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.3547 of 2004 The Management Elumalai Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank, Elumalai, Peraiyur(TK) Madurai District, through its Special officer, &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.The Appellate Authority under the Tamil [&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-217221","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - 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\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-31T02:26:03+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\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-31T02:26:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\"},\"wordCount\":957,\"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\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\",\"name\":\"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-31T02:26:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - 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\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-31T02:26:03+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\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007","datePublished":"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-31T02:26:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007"},"wordCount":957,"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\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007","name":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-31T02:26:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-management-vs-the-appellate-authority-on-15-june-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 15 June, 2007"}]},{"@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\/217221","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=217221"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217221\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217221"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}