{"id":220549,"date":"2010-04-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010"},"modified":"2015-04-16T09:55:16","modified_gmt":"2015-04-16T04:25:16","slug":"vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: H.K.Rathod,&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\/4985\/2009\t 4\/ 7\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. 4985 of 2009\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nVIJAYSINH\nGUNWANTSINH PANDAV - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nDIVISIONAL\nCONTROLLER - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nIS SUPEHIA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, \nRULE\nSERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR HS MUNSHAW for\nRespondent(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\tMR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 30\/04\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate Mr. IS Supehia on behalf of petitioner, learned<br \/>\n\tadvocate Mr. HS Munshaw appearing for respondent Corporation.\n<\/p>\n<p>Initially,<br \/>\n\tnotice for final disposal issued by this Court then on 23\/7\/2009,<br \/>\n\tfollowing order has been passed by this Court is as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t1.\tOn 23\/6\/2009<br \/>\n\tthis Court (Coram: S.R. Brahmbhatt, J) passed the following order :-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t Notice for<br \/>\nfinal disposal returnable on 23.7.2009. In the meantime and till the<br \/>\nreturnable date, specific cogent affidavit-in-reply is expected to be<br \/>\nfiled on behalf of respondet indicating as to what prevented the<br \/>\nCorporation from reinstating the workman from the date of effect of<br \/>\nthe award till its actual reinstatement and why he shall not be paid<br \/>\nfull wages for that period.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe record shows<br \/>\nthat respondent is served on 6\/7\/2009. None appears today to defend<br \/>\nthe stand of the Corporation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.\tPetitioner<br \/>\n\thas filed this petition challenging omission on the part of the<br \/>\n\trespondent in complying with the order of the Tribunal dated<br \/>\n\t2\/8\/2002, wherein it was ordered that the workman was to be<br \/>\n\treinstated with 25% back wages. In fact workman came to be<br \/>\n\treinstated only on 13\/5\/2003. Therefore the inaction on the part of<br \/>\n\tthe respondent in not reinstating workman in compliance with the<br \/>\n\torder and giving him only 25% back wages for even that period is<br \/>\n\tsought to be raised as grievance in this petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.\tThe<br \/>\n\trespondent was to be ready with their affidavit-in-reply. As it is<br \/>\n\tstated herein above none is present though served. Hence this Court<br \/>\n\tis of the view that let there by RULE, and by way of ad-interim<br \/>\n\trelief it is directed that the respondent shall deposit in the<br \/>\n\tRegistry of this Court difference of amount of back wages payable to<br \/>\n\tthe workman concerned\/ present petitioner from the date on which the<br \/>\n\taward dated 2\/8\/2002 had become capable of being complied with till<br \/>\n\tthe workman was actually reinstated, i.e. 13\/5\/2003, on or before<br \/>\n\t13\/8\/2009, failing which serious view of the matter would be taken.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.\tAdjourned to<br \/>\n\t13\/8\/2009. Direct service permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>On<br \/>\n\t13\/8\/2009, this Court has also passed following order:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThis Court vide<br \/>\n\torder dated 23\/7\/2009 issued rule and by way of ad-interim relief<br \/>\n\tdirected the respondent GSRTC to deposit in the Registry of this<br \/>\n\tCourt difference of amount of back wages payable to the workman<br \/>\n\tconcerned on\/or before 13\/8\/2009, i.e. today<\/p>\n<p>\tShri Munshaw<br \/>\n\tappears on behalf of the respondent Corporation and submits that the<br \/>\n\ttime to deposit the difference of amount of back wages payable to<br \/>\n\tthe workman-petitioner may be extend up to 18\/8\/2009 and he assures<br \/>\n\tthis Court, by that time the amount would be deposited.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe request of<br \/>\n\tShri Munshaw is accepted. The time to deposit the difference of<br \/>\n\tamount of back wages payable to the workman-petitioner is extended<br \/>\n\tup to 18\/8\/2009. There shall be no further extension in this regard.<br \/>\n\tMatter is adjourned to 20\/8\/2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tpresent petition, petitioner employee has challenged order passed by<br \/>\n\tLabour Court, Junagadh in Recovery Application no. 240\/2003 on<br \/>\n\t27\/1\/2009.  The Labour Court has rejected Recovery Application filed<br \/>\n\tby petitioner under section 33(C)(2) of I. D. Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner was working in S. T. Corporation as Electrician, who was<br \/>\n\tdismissed from service on 10\/2\/1997. Against dismissal, an<br \/>\n\tindustrial dispute was raised by petitioner before Labour Court,<br \/>\n\tJunagadh being reference no. 100\/97, which was decided on 2\/8\/2002.<br \/>\n\tThe Labour Court has set aside dismissal order and granted<br \/>\n\treinstatement with continuity of service with 25% back wages of<br \/>\n\tinterim period.  The Labour Court further directed to reinstate<br \/>\n\tpetitioner in service within a period of thirty days from date of<br \/>\n\tpublication of award.  The award was published on 16\/9\/2002 and<br \/>\n\tworkman was reinstated on 14\/5\/2003.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned<br \/>\n\tadvocate Mr. Supehia appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted<br \/>\n\tthat reinstatement with 25% back wages for interim period comes to<br \/>\n\tan end within a period of one month from date of publication of<br \/>\n\taward 16\/9\/2002. So, from date of termination 10\/2\/1997 to<br \/>\n\t16\/9\/2002, petitioner is entitled 25% back wages which was paid upto<br \/>\n\t13\/5\/2003.  But, in fact, petitioner is entitled 100% wages being a<br \/>\n\tfull wages from 16\/9\/2002 to date of actual reinstatement 14\/5\/2003<br \/>\n\twhich has been denied by Corporation.  There was a delay by S. T.<br \/>\n\tCorporation in reinstating petitioner in service.\n<\/p>\n<p>He<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that under section 17 of Industrial Dispute Act, an award<br \/>\n\tis required to be published within a period of 30 days from it<br \/>\n\treceived by Appropriate Government and within a period of 30 days<br \/>\n\tfrom date of publication under section 17 (A), an award become<br \/>\n\tenforceable against Corporation. So, on the date month is over from<br \/>\n\tdate of publication 16\/9\/2002, an award passed by Labour Court is<br \/>\n\trequired to be enforced against Corporation and Corporation must<br \/>\n\thave to be reinstated workman in service and also required to be<br \/>\n\tpaid 25% back wages of interim period.  On the contrary, S. T.<br \/>\n\tCorporation has reinstated workman on 14\/5\/2003. Therefore, for<br \/>\n\tclaiming full wages from 16\/9\/2002 to 13\/5\/2003, Recovery<br \/>\n\tapplication was preferred before Labour Court, Junagadh under<br \/>\n\tsection 33(C)(2) of I. D. Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tS. T. Corporation has filed reply vide exh 7 denying averment made<br \/>\n\tin Recovery Application.  Thereafter, matter was heard by Labour<br \/>\n\tCourt, Junagadh because either of party has not led any oral<br \/>\n\tevidence.  The question which was required to be examined by Labour<br \/>\n\tCourt, whether from date on which award become enforceable or not?<br \/>\n\tAnd come  to conclusion that workman must have to be reinstated by<br \/>\n\trespondent and workman is entitled full salary from date of which<br \/>\n\taward is become enforceable.  Instead of that, Corporation has paid<br \/>\n\t25% back wages for aforesaid period from date of enforceable award<br \/>\n\ttill date of actual reinstatement.  So, for a period of eight<br \/>\n\tmonths, S. T. Corporation has paid 25% wages not full wages.<br \/>\n\tTherefore, Recovery application was filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>He<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that Labour Court has not properly understood effect of<br \/>\n\taward and provision of Section 17 and 17(A) of I. D. Act, 1947.<br \/>\n\tAccording to award, Labour Court has granted reinstatement with 25%<br \/>\n\tback wages till date of reinstatement.  Meaning thereby that upto<br \/>\n\tdate of reinstatement, workman is entitled 25% back wages as wages<br \/>\n\tand not full wages.  Vide exh 26, S. T. Corporation has paid Rs.<br \/>\n\t64,921\/- for a period of 10\/2\/1997 to 13\/5\/2003 but S. T.<br \/>\n\tCorporation has not paid full salary from 16\/9\/2002 to 13\/5\/2003.<br \/>\n\tThe Corporation has paid 25% wages w.e.f. 10\/2\/1997 but from<br \/>\n\t16\/9\/2002 that date workman is entitled full salary upto date of<br \/>\n\treinstatement because award is not implemented immediately within a<br \/>\n\tperiod of one month by Corporation.\n<\/p>\n<p>According<br \/>\n\tto my opinion, view taken by Labour Court in Recovery application is<br \/>\n\tclearly erroneous and finding given by Labour Court, Junagadh is<br \/>\n\tcontrary to law.  The petitioner is entitled full salary from<br \/>\n\t16\/9\/2002 to 13\/5\/2003, out of that 25% back wages has been paid<br \/>\n\twhich is to be adjusted.  Therefore, remaining amount of 75% of<br \/>\n\taforesaid period is required to be paid by S. T. Corporation. The<br \/>\n\tview taken by Labour Court is erroneous apparently on face on record<br \/>\n\tbecause ultimately award is required to be implemented by S. T.<br \/>\n\tCorporation within a period of one month from date of publication<br \/>\n\tand if that award is not implemented accordingly, then from that<br \/>\n\tdate onward workman is entitled full wages from S. T. Corporation<br \/>\n\ttill date of actual reinstatement.\n<\/p>\n<p>Therefore,<br \/>\n\torder passed by Labour Court in Recovery application no. 240\/2003<br \/>\n\tdated 27\/1\/2009 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is directed to<br \/>\n\tS. T. Corporation to pay 75% wages for a period of 16\/9\/2002 to<br \/>\n\t13\/5\/2003 within a period of two months from date of receiving copy<br \/>\n\tof present order. Accordingly, present petition is allowed. Rule is<br \/>\n\tmade absolute to that extent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(H.K.RATHOD,<br \/>\nJ)<\/p>\n<p>asma<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010 Author: H.K.Rathod,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/4985\/2009 4\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4985 of 2009 ========================================================= VIJAYSINH GUNWANTSINH PANDAV &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER &#8211; Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR IS SUPEHIA [&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-220549","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>Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 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\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-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=\"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-16T04:25:16+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\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-16T04:25:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1234,\"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\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-16T04:25:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 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":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 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\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-16T04:25:16+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\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-16T04:25:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010"},"wordCount":1234,"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\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010","name":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-16T04:25:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vijaysinh-vs-divisional-on-30-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vijaysinh vs Divisional on 30 April, 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\/220549","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=220549"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220549\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220549"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220549"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220549"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}