{"id":221167,"date":"2011-04-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011"},"modified":"2018-10-24T21:06:13","modified_gmt":"2018-10-24T15:36:13","slug":"b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","title":{"rendered":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: J.B.Pardiwala,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/6319\/2001\t 9\/ 9\tJUDGMENT \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. 6319 of 2001\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nB\nV GOR - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nGUJARAT\nWATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD & 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nNALIN K THAKKER for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) : 1, \nRULE\nSERVED for Respondent(s) :\n2, \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 J.B.PARDIWALA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 14\/03\/2011 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
\t\tPetitioner
\nby way of this writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the
\nConstitution, has prayed for the following reliefs.\n<\/p>\n
“11 (A).\tYour Lordships
\nbe pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
\ndirection or other order under Article 226 of the Constitution of
\nIndia, and to quash and set aside the impugned penalty order dated
\n21.8.1999 (Annexure : G) and impugned letter dated 29.11.2000
\n(Annexure: I) and the impugned suspension order dated 20.6.1997
\n(Annexure : C) and to declare that the departmental proceedings
\ninitiated against the petitioner are ab-initio void and illegal, and
\nnot sustainable in the eye of law;\n<\/p>\n
(B)\tYour Lordships may be
\npleased to grant the stay of implementing the impugned penalty order
\ndt. 21.8.1999 (Annexure : G) pending admission, hearing and final
\ndisposal of this petition;”\n<\/p>\n
2.\t\tBrief
\nfacts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition can be
\nsummarized as under:\n<\/p>\n
2.1\t\tPetitioner
\nwas appointed as Junior Clerk at Bhuj in the office of respondent
\nNo.2 vide order dated 21\/07\/1984.  At the relevant point of time when
\nthe petition was preferred, he was working as Junior Clerk in office
\nof respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 – Gujarat Water Supply and
\nSewerage Board is State (within the meaning of Article 12 of the
\nConstitution). In the year 1997, a departmental inquiry was initiated
\nagainst the petitioner on some charges of misconduct.\n<\/p>\n
2.2\t\tTo
\nput in brief petitioner was charged of having put an office note for
\npurchase of printing stationary and printing forms with Ambika
\nStationary Manufacturer and Consumer Co-operative Societies Ltd., and
\nin this regard some irregularities in purchase of said printing
\nstationary were noticed by the authorities. Show-cause notice was
\nissued calling upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why
\nappropriate penalty should not be imposed upon the petitioner. Record
\nfurther reveals that the petitioner was placed under suspension by
\nBoard vide order dated 20\/06\/1997 and was ordered to be reinstated in
\nservice by order dated 20\/06\/1998.  After a full fledged departmental
\ninquiry, the disciplinary authority came to a conclusion that
\npetitioner did indulge in some irregularities and therefore thought
\nfit to impose a penalty of withholding of one increment for a period
\nof two years. It deserves to be noted that the order of disciplinary
\nauthority was a subject matter of challenge by way of appeal as
\nprovided under the Rules.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t\tAppeal
\nwas preferred on 14\/10\/1999 before the authority viz., Member
\nSecretary of the Board.  On 29\/11\/2000 petitioner was informed vide a
\nletter signed by one S S Pujar, Chief Administrative Officer of the
\nBoard that the appeal has been ordered to be dismissed and the order
\nof the disciplinary authority imposing penalty of withholding of one
\nincrement for two years stands confirmed. Communication to the
\npetitioner about the dismissal of his appeal is at page No.47.\n<\/p>\n
4.\t\tThis
\nmatter was substantially heard on 07\/03\/2011.  On that day, I called
\nupon learned Counsel for the Board, Mr.Munshaw to explain as to
\nwhether Page No.47 is just a communication about dismissal of the
\nappeal or that a substantive well reasoned order, has been passed by
\nthe appellate authority and that, if it has been passed whether it
\nhas been communicated to the petitioner.  Mr.Munshaw, on that day,
\nprayed for sometime to enable him to obtain instructions in this
\nregard.\n<\/p>\n
4.1\t\tToday,
\nwhen the matter is taken up, Mr.Munshaw, has placed before me the
\noriginal file to enable me to verify as to whether any substantial
\norder has been passed by the appellate authority or not. I have
\npersonally perused the file.  The file reveals that one Mr.M N
\nRandavi, Officer of Board, prepared a short note giving a fair idea
\nabout the matter and about the decision taken by the disciplinary
\nauthority. Below the note, some notings have been made handwritten
\nand it appears that it has been stated below the note that Member
\nSecretary is the competent authority to decide the appeal and
\ntherefore with this note it appears that the same was placed before
\nthe Member Secretary, who in his handwriting has put a small note “it
\nis not possible to allow the appeal”. Except this I do not
\nfind anything to even remotely suggest that there was any serious
\nconsideration by the appellate authority so far as the appeal of the
\npetitioner is concerned.\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tIt
\nis abundantly clear from the notings in the file that there is no
\norder passed by the appellate authority which would indicate any
\nindependent application of mind by the appellate authority. The
\nfindings which are recorded by the disciplinary authority can always
\nbe reappreicated by the appellate authority.  As an appellate
\nauthority, it can take a different view on the same set of evidence.
\nAppellate authority also owes a duty to see as to whether procedure
\nlaid down in the rules was complied with, inquiry officer was
\njustified in arriving at the finding that the delinquent officer was
\nguilty of the misconduct alleged against him and, whether penalty
\nimposed by the disciplinary authority was excessive.\n<\/p>\n
6.\t\tI
\nam of the view that the appellate authority has failed to discharge
\nhis duty as the law demands.  Appeal is a statutory remedy available
\nto the petitioner as a delinquent.  It is a valuable right which the
\nrules has conferred upon the petitioner as a delinquent and,
\ntherefore the delinquent is well within his rights to expect the
\nappellate authority to reconsider the entire matter being the final
\nfact finding authority.\n<\/p>\n
7.\t\tI
\nam not at all satisfied with the manner in which the appeal is
\ndecided and disposed of.  It is a settled position of law that an
\nappellate order if it is in agreement with that of the disciplinary
\nauthority may not be a speaking order but the authority passing the
\nsame must show that there had been proper application of mind on his
\npart as regard the compliance of the requirement of the law while
\nexercising his jurisdiction under the Rules.\n<\/p>\n
7.1\t\tIn
\ncase of Apparel Export Promotion Council Vs. A.K. Chopra [1991 (1)
\nSCC 759], it has been stated as under:\n<\/p>\n
“The
\nHigh Court appears to have overlooked the settled position that in
\ndepartmental proceedings, the disciplinary authority is the sole
\njudge of facts and in case an appeal is presented to the appellate
\nauthority, the appellate authority has also the power\/and
\njurisdiction to re-appreciate the evidence and come to its own
\nconclusion, on facts, being the sole fact-finding authorities.”\n<\/p>\n
\t(Emphasis
\nsupplied)<\/p>\n
7.2\t\tIn
\ncase of Narinder Mohan Arya Vs. United India Insurance Co Ltd., &
\nOrs., [AIR 2006 SC 1748], in paragraph No.36 and 37 the Hon’ble
\nApex Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
“36. The order of the
\nappellate authority demonstrates total non-application of mind. The
\nappellate authority, when the rules require application of mind on
\nseveral factors and serious contentions have been raised, was bound
\nto assign reasons so as enable the writ court to ascertain as to
\nwhether he had applied his mind to the relevant factors which the
\nstatute requires him to do. The expression ‘consider’ is of some
\nsignificance. In the context of the rules, the appellate authority
\nwas required to see as to whether (i) the procedure laid down in the
\nrules was complied with; (ii) the Enquiry Officer was justified in
\narriving at the finding that the delinquent officer was guilty of the
\nmisconduct alleged against him; and (iii) whether penalty imposed by
\nthe disciplinary authority was excessive.\n<\/p>\n
37.In
\nR.P. Bhatt v. Union of India<\/a> [(1986) 2 SCC 651] this Court opined:\n<\/p>\n
“The
\nword “consider” in Rule 27(2) implies “due application
\nof mind”. It is clear upon the terms of Rule 27(2) that the
\nAppellate Authority is required to consider (1) whether the procedure
\nlaid down in the Rules has been complied with; and if not, whether
\nsuch non-compliance has resulted in violation of any provisions of
\nthe Constitution or in failure of justice; (2) whether the findings
\nof the disciplinary authority are warranted by the evidence on
\nrecord; and (3) whether the penalty imposed is adequate; and
\nthereafter pass orders confirming, enhancing etc. the penalty, or may
\nremit back the case to the authority which imposed the same. Rule
\n27(2) casts a duty on the Appellate Authority to consider the
\nrelevant factors set forth in clauses (a), (b) and (c) thereof.\n<\/p>\n
There is no indication in the
\nimpugned order that the Director General was satisfied as to whether
\nthe procedure laid down in the Rules had been complied with; and if
\nnot, whether such non-compliance had resulted in violation of any of
\nthe provisions of the Constitution or in failure of justice. We
\nregret to find that the Director General has also not given any
\nfinding on the crucial question as to whether the findings of the
\ndisciplinary authority were warranted by the evidence on record. It
\nseems that he only applied his mind to the requirement of clause (c)
\nof Rule 27(2) viz. whether the penalty imposed was adequate or
\njustified in the facts and circumstances of the present case. There
\nbeing non-compliance with the requirements of Rule 27(2) of the
\nRules, the impugned order passed by the Director General is liable to
\nbe set aside.”\n<\/p>\n
7.3\t\tIn a
\nrecent pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the matter of Divisional
\nForest Officer, Kothagudem & Ors. Vs. Madhusudhan Rao reported in
\n(2008) 3 SCC 469, the Supreme Court has observed in paragraph
\nNo.20 as under:\n<\/p>\n
“20.\t\tIt
\nis no doubt also true that an appellate or revisional authority is
\nnot required to give detailed reasons for agreeing and confirming an
\norder passed by the lower forum but, in our view, in the interests of
\njustice, the delinquent officer is entitled to know at least the mind
\nof the appellate or revisional authority in dismissing his appeal
\nand\/or revision.  It is true that no detailed reasons
\nare required to be given, but some brief reasons should be indicated
\neven in an order affirming the views of the lower forum.”\n<\/p>\n
7.4\t\tIn
\nthe facts and circumstances of the case, it would also be appropriate
\nfor me to quote the well known judgment of the Apex Court in
\nBachhittar Singh Vs. State of Punjab. It was a case where a
\nConstitution Bench of the Apex Court had to consider the effect of an
\norder passed by a Minister on a file, which order was not
\ncommunicated.  This is how the Apex Court dealt with the effect of
\nthe noting by a Minister on a file: [AIR 1963 SC 395 (Para No.9)].\n<\/p>\n
‘9. The question, therefore,
\nis whether he did in fact make such an order.  Merely writing
\nsomething on the file does not amount to an order. Before something
\namounts to an order of the State Government two things are necessary.
\n The order has to be expressed in the name of the Governor as
\nrequired by clause (1) of Article 166 and then it has to be
\ncommunicated.  As already indicated, no formal order modifying the
\ndecision of the Revenue Secretary was ever made.  Until such an order
\nis drawn up the State Government cannot, in our opinion, be regarded
\nas bound by what was stated in the file.  As long as the matter
\nrested with him the Revenue Minister could well score out his remarks
\nor minutes on the file and write fresh ones.’<\/p>\n
(emphasis
\nsupplied)<\/p>\n
8.\t\tIn
\nthis view of the matter, I am left with no other option, but to remit
\nthe matter to the appellate authority viz., Member Secretary of
\nrespondent No.1 – Board for fresh consideration of the appeal
\nin accordance with law, rules and regulations.  I deem it fit and
\nproper to dispose of this petition with the following directions.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\n\tappellate authority viz., Member Secretary of respondent No.1 Board
\n\tshall reconsider the entire appeal of the petitioner afresh.\n<\/p>\n
\tSince it
\n\tis an appeal, the appellate authority shall also give reasonable
\n\topportunity to the petitioner to make good his case in person.  The
\n\tappellate authority shall hear the petitioner in this regard.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt will
\n\tbe open for the petitioner to add few grounds of challenge, if at
\n\tall thought fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n
\tAfter
\n\tgiving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the appellate
\n\tauthority shall record reasons in brief at least to prima-facie
\n\tindicate as to what has been considered by him; what has weighed
\n\twith him and, what is his final conclusion in this regard.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\n\tappellate authority shall issue a notice to the petitioner of the
\n\tdate of hearing and on that particular date petitioner may remain
\n\tpresent to make his submissions, if thought fit, otherwise it will
\n\tbe open for the appellate authority to proceed in accordance with
\n\tlaw and decide the appeal afresh.  This exercise shall be undertaken
\n\tby the appellate authority within a week from the date of receipt of
\n\tthe writ of this Court and shall complete the same with final orders
\n\twithin six weeks from thereafter.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the
\n\tevent, if the order passed by the appellate authority is adverse, it
\n\twill be open for the petitioner to challenge the same on all grounds
\n\tavailable to the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
9.
\nPetition is disposed of in terms of the directions issued above. It
\nis clarified that this petition is disposed of on this small issue
\nand I have not expressed any opinion so far as the merits of the
\nmatter are concerned.  Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.\n<\/p>\n
(J
\nB PARDIWALA, J.)<\/p>\n
sompura <\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 Author: J.B.Pardiwala,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/6319\/2001 9\/ 9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6319 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed […]<\/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-221167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nB vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - 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\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-24T15:36:13+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-24T15:36:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\"},\"wordCount\":2206,\"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\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\",\"name\":\"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-24T15:36:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - 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\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-24T15:36:13+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011","datePublished":"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-24T15:36:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011"},"wordCount":2206,"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\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011","name":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-24T15:36:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-vs-gujarat-on-6-april-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"B vs Gujarat on 6 April, 2011"}]},{"@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\/221167","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=221167"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221167\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}