{"id":220072,"date":"2008-09-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-03-27T23:35:59","modified_gmt":"2018-03-27T18:05:59","slug":"the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KLARNATAKA, ~ \n\n[)A'I'ED THIS THE 19TH DAY 01: SEPTEMVEER gm T  &  \n\nBEFORE \n\nTHE I~IC}N'13jlLE MR. JLISTIQE) 1\u00e9;m\u00a71MoHA2~:AF:E;n:\u00a7&*' \n\nVwmr P'E.\"1\"'If{'.{(i)N NO. 138%{8~ 01%? 20:)?' iL--R1:;s\u00a7kk\n\n*1'1~:}3: GENERAL MANAGER   \nom KENT ROAD' V  V. 1 . \nMANCSALORE,  - 2 \n\n PETITION ER\n\n(By Sri ': \"Y Hfggiri\u00a7\u00e9a;:3sA\ufb01,a'ADv.)\"\"W \nAND _ _  .   .\n1  ;<:_ smNTH.A" \n.M.A.Jc:\u00abI:n  -\n\n~  Rj;\u00ab=~.T M M"GAR_\u00a73EN\ncrm KENT ROAD\n\n  \n\n  ENGINEER\n\n  CIVIL DIVISION\n" NEANGALGRE.\n" . 3  RESPGNDENTS\n\n 5.' 3:4\/S: M (:2 NARASIMHAN ASSOCIATES, ADV FOR R1 )\n_  '(BY SR1. H JAYAKAR SHETTY, CGC FOR R2)\n\nTHIS WRIT PETITION IS FILE!) UNDER ARTICLES 226\n\nAND 'Z227 OF THE CONS'i'I'Ti}TION OF INDIA PRAYING TO\n\nQUASH THE AWARD D'I'., 9.3.2007 PASSED IN CR\nN024] 1998 3? THE CEENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN'DUS'I'I'~\u00a7'iAL\nTRIB-UNAL--CUM~LABQUR COURT VIBE' ANNEXA.\n\nM\n\n\n\nTHITS PEITETION, COMING ON FOR PREI,IMiNARY\nHEARING }N 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY THE COURT.\nTHE FOLLOWING:  ' \u00bb.   \n\nThe 1st: respondent havn <\/pre>\n
petitioner as a Sweeper cm, _paI’f–tin:c <\/p>\n
1979 upto 2-3-1986 and  nuptoTV~n18\u00a5{)2%\u00a71990,<\/p>\n
a}1egi11g dernal of  . nWi.thou\u00a3”A notice or
\ncompensation, ixzitiatx:-,V<V}1V_  '3j:fQ\u00e9eediI1gs uncier<\/p>\n
the II1c1L1st1'ia'\u00ab3.~;'i   '," vfnf short Act, which<\/p>\n
when ended in  the Central Government,<\/p>\n
exarcisixaugnjnrisiiimcf;ig)i1… I;1nder Section 10 of the Act,<\/p>\n
 refm\u00a7;'n;i":t;e di$p1n1t4:_&for a.djudicat:i.on, by order dated 10-<\/p>\n
  192-..?8'\u00abtcs..i1iY1s_.Centra1 Cmvemment hldushial Tribunal-<\/p>\n
c;–L13::3.n4Lab<ii1;1'VA'n:= "Court, where it was reg"st<=:red as<\/p>\n
 C.I\u20ac.u1\\T{)'\u00a7'V24.\/4"1998. Before the Labour Conn, the<\/p>\n
 "..j_=.j;\u00a7e\ufb01ti'o:nnr was arraignccl as 2nd party No.1 and the: 2116<\/p>\n
'  \ufb01gs\ufb01\u00e9ndent as 2114 party No.2. The 1st I'f:Sp0I1d(3:I'1t filed<\/p>\n
u M1161' statement of claim, which was resisted by filing<\/p>\n
Statement of objections of the petitioner denying the<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
existence of master and servant reiationstlip,  <\/p>\n
QM respondent, did not choose to \ufb01le a C0'm1i\u00e9f.,   " " 2<\/p>\n
respondent though examined as' W\ufb01k\ufb01il was jiloii' \ufb01\u00a3Iofsi.*3_{-<\/p>\n
examined while the petiticiizexj \ufb01ler}. on V  'of'; one\u00bb . L'<\/p>\n
witness in lieu of recording   I\\{fW–1 and
\nwas not tendered  The Labour
\nCiotlrt, on the ljaeis  evidence of the
\n131;     and directed
\n"  of rei\ufb01statement by
\n Hence this writ<\/p>\n
petition.   "\n<\/p>\n
 :;””‘I;CaI.~;1(~:-C1 eoiitxsel for the petitioner contends that<\/p>\n
 e–..tIVi’:e ‘V  did not lay before the Tribunal<\/p>\n
legal eviclernce of the fact that she was a<\/p>\n
 and had werked for 240 days in the year<\/p>\n
A   –p3;’eoedi.ng the alleged termination. According to the<\/p>\n
  …1eamed counsel, filing of an af\ufb02davit, being her own<\/p>\n
statement, in her favour, cannot be regarded as<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
sut\ufb01cient evidence for the Labour Court to come \ufb01e-.Tthe<\/p>\n
conciusian that the 1st respondent was the <\/p>\n
employee and had in fact worked for   _  <\/p>\n
Leaxned coimsei hastens to   <\/p>\n
recorded by the Labour C\u00a7o1V_1:.:’t;4_is p\u00e9rgf\u00e9rse.  A .. V’ 1<\/p>\n
3. Per comzra, Sri, Nara3*.a:i1’sWamy, 1\u00e9a1*11ed: counsel
\nfor the 1st respondent’4’v\u00a33_1*1e\ufb011\u20ac{\u00a71;ilyIb\u00e9iza\ufb01\u00e9iads that the 1st<\/p>\n
respondent pla\ufb01jtrd  Court relevant<\/p>\n
ev1dex:.c\u00a7%kTa;1\u00e9iAsm\u00e9ra j%%c\u00a7up1s\u00e9%kkk%unth the unchallenged
\ntestim<V\u00a713.y– sf'  '1't=$p6ndent in the a\ufb02idavit, there<\/p>\n
wasAsub$t\u00e9\u00a7i1f\u00a7a1'1c\u20acg\u00e9}-\u00e9iii\ufb01}e11ce of the fact of master and<\/p>\n
 V'  2 'i'r.3,iatioii\u00e9Q}*\ufb01\u00a7_3 and for having worked<\/p>\n
  240 days in the year immediately<\/p>\n
pit":-z:_._ec\u00a5,i_r1g  terxnination.\n<\/p>\n
V’ V’ V. x ‘ 4..\u00e9A4;V”I”iaviI1g heard the lC3.}’I1.(id counsel for the parties<\/p>\n
*  ‘a:r1\u00a71’AAexa.mined the order ixnpugned, What is patent is<\/p>\n
” “that there is no discussion whatsoever over the<\/p>\n
documents produced by th\u00e9 lst respencient in support<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
of her elairrz that she had worked for 240 days in.T’&-year<\/p>\n
immediateiy preceding the alleged.\n<\/p>\n
co:r1traz’y, what is animated in the awaI1:1.Vi_s;”‘t.t;a’:A_t.’t_*V:te% _  <\/p>\n
reeponde:’1t’s evidence by jwayr <\/p>\n
tmehellenged as there was _11e e1*eSe\u00bbexa11*:\u00a711{a}:i.\u00a3}n\u00a73′: ‘S05<\/p>\n
21150, the Labour Court ebeemed ‘t.h\u00e9L’t  was<\/p>\n
discharged, but his testimtinye .3510 avaii, since he
\nwas not textzdered for e_re’es_\u00abe5\u00a7;a1};I3ir:1atiz\u00a7:_tj1..These are the<\/p>\n
twe aspects {of   in the mind of<\/p>\n
the Iebe1:I’ V  t  a \ufb01nding that the let
\nrespendeizigwas en’Ae111p\u00a7{oyee of the petitgiener, whe had<\/p>\n
 \u00e9_ iI1V_’f\u00a3:’:*::{‘,)1′.:})’;l’Vfv,t in iZ\u00bb\u00a340.__.deys ef continuous service in a year,<\/p>\n
 ‘ jireeedjng the termination.\n<\/p>\n
5;’ The fact that the 1st respondent p}”GdL1C\u20acCi<\/p>\n
  d{)\u20ac.f11II}’f:?I:1\u00a5ZS in support of her case of employment. and<\/p>\n
“‘ee::t.i11:1.(>us service, and those deem11eI”1te were marked,<\/p>\n
   Exhibits neverttheiese the contents of the dOCli1’Il\u20acI’1t.S<\/p>\n
were not proved in evidence. If only the eentents are<\/p>\n
H<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
established tiicn, and than alone, the docxzmemfsare<\/p>\n
admissibie in cvid.enct;~:, Admittcitdly tha petitiezzu\ufb01; <\/p>\n
the claim of the 13: 1*t::spoI1.de;1t, and in   tli\u00e9u  <\/p>\n
matter, the 1st, rt-izspondent, <\/p>\n
additionai evidence 1:0 prove: A’-\u00a5;1:1″e.   .i:i:ea\u00a7 ~ *’<\/p>\n
documents. _ _ ‘_ I\n<\/p>\n
6. A plain r\u20ac*.:;i1dV_ing r:)f’th\u00a3ij4dV\u00e9\ufb01.11itie;iVV6f Q\u00e9mpioyer’<\/p>\n
in Section 2(g) of the    an industry<\/p>\n
ca1Tic;::1″\u00e9}i91″i33;\u00a7\u00bbV{)r \ufb01le a\ufb01t\ufb01ority of a11}; depa1*tmen1:
\nof  or a State Govermnent,<\/p>\n
2nea,I:$ t.he aI}tjf;oi’ity”-pf\u00e9scribed 33:1 that behalf, or whe;-re<\/p>\n
 V.  – 1j1ci’ ::{1′”1.ti!’1:)ri%\u00a5Li3esA is 1:)’1V’\u00e9’:\u00e9ir,\u00ab’V1″*i1:>(3c1, the Head of the Depar2:II1ent;<\/p>\n
 2i::;__d V [3;i.:”r\u00a2iz\u00e9.tiQn :0 an industzry carried on by a meal<\/p>\n
a};1’iI.[10Ijivi\u00a7’;. Chief Executive Oi\ufb01cer, In the instant<\/p>\n
 ‘  case  is no material can record to establish that the<\/p>\n
U.;_:e\u00bb*.:\u00e9}:ioz1e1’ or the 2nd respondent are the prescribed<\/p>\n
  ….:-iutho\ufb02ties of the Central Govennnent. Thus the: need<\/p>\n
to impieaci the Unian Government was essantial, so as<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
qL1as1″;ing the award and remitting the proceeding for<\/p>\n
consideration afresh after CXt\u20acfI}.diI1g <\/p>\n
opportunity cf lqearing to the  <\/p>\n
incnuungxecen\ufb01ngcnwnanmonaxemasnccirany,andtg<\/p>\n
corzclxxdc: tiha proceeclings and pa}3\u00a7  aw\u00e9;r._ri,” stricigiy-~,i\ufb01*–.V<\/p>\n
a.cc0rdam3e wi.ti1 law by assi.g;ii1<3g mat\u00e9ujatzs, _"\u00a3"1J:1'<i.},i11gs anal<\/p>\n
c0n1":1:.1sicms, as expt:cti\u00a7i.oL1.s1\u00a7k'"as.: 'pokmjble. VE~';i1%1t':<+': the 2m;
\nrcspmcxdc-::\u00a31t is the Assisf311t"vE\u00a7ie(:x;fi\u20ac?g3,Erlgirleer of the<\/p>\n
Pasta} Dt:pa;*t:;~\ufb01.:\u00a23 :}t:,   who is the<\/p>\n
clajm\u00e9ult -. bsVf<\u00a7i'z1d Party. Writ petition is ordered<\/p>\n
Sd\/–\n<\/p>\n
Iudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008 Author: Ram Mohan Reddy IN THE HIGH COURT OF KLARNATAKA, ~ [)A’I’ED THIS THE 19TH DAY 01: SEPTEMVEER gm T & BEFORE THE I~IC}N’13jlLE MR. JLISTIQE) 1\u00e9;m\u00a71MoHA2~:AF:E;n:\u00a7&*’ Vwmr P’E.”1″‘If{‘.{(i)N NO. 138%{8~ 01%? 20:)?’ iL–R1:;s\u00a7kk *1’1~:}3: GENERAL MANAGER om KENT ROAD’ […]<\/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-220072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 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\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-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=\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-27T18:05:59+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=\"6 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-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-27T18:05:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1012,\"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\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\",\"name\":\"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-27T18:05:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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 General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 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\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-27T18:05:59+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-27T18:05:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008"},"wordCount":1012,"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\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008","name":"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-27T18:05:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-general-manager-telecom-vs-smt-k-shantha-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The General Manager Telecom vs Smt K Shantha on 19 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/220072","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=220072"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220072\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}