{"id":221759,"date":"2011-03-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011"},"modified":"2016-07-03T13:01:14","modified_gmt":"2016-07-03T07:31:14","slug":"maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: H.K.Rathod,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/10506\/2002\t 12\/ 12\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. 10506 of 2002\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10466 of 2002\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 12577 of 2003\n \n\nwith\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION NO 11175 OF 2002 \n\n \n\nWITH\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION NO 10503 OF 2002 \n\n \n\n \n \n=====================================================\n \n\nMAGANBHAI\nDAYARAM VAMJA & 6 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n===================================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMS TEJAL K SHAH for\nPetitioner(s) : 1 - 7. \nMr. SK Shah for petitioners. \n\n \n\nMr.\nUmang Oza, AGP for State Authority.  \nMR DC DAVE for Panchayat\nAuthority. \n\n \n\nMr.\nHS Munshaw for Panchayat Authority.\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: 05\/10\/2007 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
Heard
\n\tlearned Advocate Ms. Tejal K. Shah and Mr. SK Shah for the
\n\tpetitioners; Mr. Oza, learned AGP as well as Mr. Munshaw for the
\n\tPanchayat Authority in these petitions.\n<\/p>\n
As
\n\tper the case of the petitioners herein, State of Gujarat was running
\n\tvarious centres under a scheme known as Sarvodaya Scheme in the
\n\tstate for rendering various social services for which the Government
\n\twas paying 100 per cent grant for running the said centres and the
\n\tappointment of the staff was made as per rules and approved by the
\n\tGovernment. Petitioners were appointed on different posts as
\n\tmentioned in Annexure A to respective petitions.  Development
\n\tCommissioner who was supervising the scheme had fixed the basic pay
\n\tof the petitioners. Thereafter, by resolution dated 18.7.1980, the
\n\tGovernment decided to abolish the Sarvodaya Scheme and on 30.7.1981,
\n\ta resolution was passed. Para 5 thereof was providing that the full
\n\ttime employees under the sarvodaya centres who had completed one
\n\tyear of services under the scheme as on 31.3.1981 will be absorved
\n\tin ex cadre posts under the panchayat in their existing pay scale
\n\tand the existing salaries and allowances w.e.f. 1.9.1981. Ex cadre
\n\temployees of the scheme representing to absorb in regular cadre
\n\tunder the panchayat filed SCA No. 4246 of 1983 and during the
\n\tpendency of the petition, by letter dated 16.12.1986, Government had
\n\ttaken decision to absorb the ex cadre employees in the panchayat
\n\tservice and to give benefit given to panchayat employees, therefore,
\n\tsaid petition was withdrawn. Panchayat Service Selection Board  was
\n\tthereafter instructed by the State Government that until question of
\n\tabsorption of employees in regular panchayat service is not solved,
\n\tno further vacancies should be filled up by letter dated 18.3.1987.
\n\tBut thereafter, Government passed resolution dated 15.12.1987 and
\n\tabsorbed petitioners in the scale of Rs.950-1500 (pre revised pay
\n\tscale of Rs.260-400) i.e. In the lower pay scale. It is pertinent to
\n\tnote that after this resolution, Government gave equal pay scales to
\n\temployees of District Panchayat Bhavnagar Panchmahals, Jamnagar and
\n\tAmreli but thereafter by order dated 22.9.1988 and 15.12.88, DDO
\n\tconcerned instructed to implement resolution dated 15.12.87, the
\n\tdistrict employees filed SCA NO. 8066 of 1988 and same is pending
\n\tbefore this court as submitted by petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the resolution dated 15.12.87 absorbing petitioners in a
\n\tlower scale and also asked them to give undertaking prescribed by
\n\tthe Government as per the resolution dated 15.12.87, petitioners
\n\tgave undertaking with objction but were given consent for being
\n\tabsorbed in the scale of Rs.950-1500 but the said undertakings were
\n\tgiven under protest and without prejudice to their rights and
\n\tcontentions to challenge the decision. As per the case of
\n\tpetitioner, such decision of absorbing petitioners in the pay scale
\n\tof Rs.1200-2040 (pre revised pay scale of Rs.330-560 and not
\n\tabsorbing them in equivalent posts carrying pay scale of
\n\tRs.1400-2600 is illegal arbitrary and illegal Based upon these
\n\tfacts, petitioners have filed these petitions before this Court.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\temployee of this Yojna challenged the decision of Government before
\n\tthis Hon’ble Court. As a result of intervention of this Hon’ble
\n\tCourt, a compromise was reached between the Government and it was
\n\tdecided to absorb these employees in Government Panchayat services.
\n\tThereafter, employees were absorbed as Ex-cadre employees in
\n\tPanchayat services in temporary basis with existing pay scale and
\n\tallowances which they were drawing when they were working under the
\n\tsaid Yojna without any future benefits like promotion, increments
\n\tand other retiral benefits.\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter,
\n\tthe employees agitated against such conditions imposed by the
\n\tGovernment. They made representation to the Government which was
\n\tconsidered favourably and these employees were treated as fresh
\n\trecruits in Panchayat service w.e.f. 1st April 1987. As
\n\tper the facts of these petitions, some of the petitioners have
\n\tretired from service whereas some are in service, have to retire
\n\tafterwards. Learned advocate Ms. Shah submitted that identical facts
\n\thas been examined by this Court in SCA 14642 of 2003 (Coram :
\n\tHon’ble Mr. Akshay H. Mehata, J.) where petitioners were retired
\n\tfrom service, in this two matters difference is only that
\n\tpetitioners are working with the respondent likely to retire after
\n\tsome time, except that, there is no other  difference and factual
\n\taspect between earlier matter and present petitions.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tadvocate Ms. Shah submitted that decision given by this Court as
\n\treferred above is not challenged by the State Government and
\n\tdecision to that effect has been taken by the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tadvocate Ms. Shah relied upon  the decisions of this Court in
\n\tidentical facts in SCA 6992\/2002, 6996 of 2002, 8680 of 2002, 8972
\n\tof 2002, and 8974 of 2002 dated 9\/3\/2006 (Coram : Hon’ble Mr.
\n\tJustice  Akil Qureshi, J)  this group of petition has been also
\n\tdecided by this Court which having identical facts and therefore,
\n\tlearned advocate Ms. Shah submitted that some suitable direction may
\n\tbe issued to the respondent to decide their claim or grievance on
\n\tthe basis of aforesaid two decisions within some reasonable time.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the aforesaid factual aspect as well as the decisions
\n\trendered by this Court on the basis of identical facts, it is
\n\tdirected to the respondent to consider the grievance of the
\n\tpetitioner, and to grant consequential service benefits\/pensionary
\n\tbenefit from the date of initial appointment and to fix their salary
\n\ton the basis of their  original respective pay scale as decided by
\n\tthis Court while considering the decisions of this Court as referred
\n\tabove and pass appropriate reasoned order within a period of two
\n\tmonths from the date of receiving the copy of the said order and
\n\tcommunicate the decision to the petitioner. Meaning thereby, in SCA
\n\tNo. 10506 of 2002, as per Annexure-A, original pay scale of the
\n\tpetitioners therein is Rs.300-560, so, benefits have to be given to
\n\tthem on that basis as per the decisions of this court referred to
\n\tabove and in the same manner, benefits have to be given to the
\n\tpetitioners in other petitions on the basis of their respective
\n\toriginal pay scales.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis the law settled by the Hon’ble apex court that once, identical
\n\tmatter has been examined by the Court between the parties in respect
\n\tof the questions raised in the proceedings, then, subsequently such
\n\tanother similarly situated employee is not required to file separate
\n\tproceedings for getting similar benefits as directed in earlier case
\n\tby the Court, meaning thereby, once identical issue has been decided
\n\tby the court and if the other employee who is similarly situated to
\n\tthe earlier petitioner, then, he should not have to file separate
\n\tproceedings for getting similar benefits. These principles have been
\n\tlaid down by the apex court in following two decisions:\n<\/p>\n
(1)\tKT
\n\tVeerappa & Ors. V\/s. State of Karnataka \treported in 2006(4)
\n\tSCALE page 293.\n<\/p>\n
(2)\tState
\n\tof Karnataka & Ors. Versus C. Lalitha \treported in 2006(1)
\n\tSupreme 640.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tcase of  KT Veerappa & Ors. V\/s. State of Karnataka
\n\treported in 2006(4) SCALE page 293, the apex court
\n\tobserved as under in para 16 of the judgment :\n<\/p>\n
?S16.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe defence of the State Government that as the appellants were not
\n\tthe petitioners in the writ petition filed by 23 employees of the
\n\trespondent – University to whom the benefit of revised pay scales
\n\twas granted by the Court, the appellants are estopped from raising
\n\ttheir claim of revised pay scales in the year 1992-94, is wholly
\n\tunjustified, patently irrational, arbitrary and discriminatory.  As
\n\tnoticed in the earlier part of this judgment, revised pay scales
\n\twere given to those 23 employees in the year 1991 when the contempt
\n\tproceedings were initiated against the Vice- Chancellor and the
\n\tRegistrar of the University of Mysore.  The benefits having been
\n\tgiven to 23 employees of the University in compliance with the
\n\tdecision dated 21\/6\/1989 recorded by the learned Single Judge in
\n\tW.P. Nos. 21487-21506\/1982, it was expected that without resorting
\n\tto any of the methods the other employees identically placed,
\n\tincluding the appellants, would have been given the same benefits,
\n\twhich would have avoided not only unnecessary litigation but also
\n\tthe movement of files and papers which only waste public time.??\n<\/p>\n
\tIn
\n\tcase of State of Karnataka & Ors. Versus C. Lalitha
\n\treported in 2006(1) Supreme 640, the apex court
\n\tobserved as under :\n<\/p>\n
?SImportant
\npoints: Service jurisprudence evolved from time to time postulates
\nthat all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly.
\nOnly because one person has approached the Court that would not mean
\nthat persons similarly situated should be treated as differently.??\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,
\n\tcase of the petitioners herein is covered by the decisions referred
\n\tto by learned Advocate Ms. Shah and, therefore, being similarly
\n\tsituated, petitioner is entitled for such relief.\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,
\n\tit is open for the petitioner, to supply the copy of petition to the
\n\trespondent within a period of one month from the date of receiving
\n\tthe copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n
As
\n\tand when respondent receive the copy of petition, it is directed to
\n\tthe respondent to examine the grievance of the petitioner and
\n\tconsider the same in light of the aforesaid two decisions delivered
\n\tby this Court and pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance with
\n\tlaw within a period of two months and communicate the decision
\n\timmediately to the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis also directed to the respondent, to consider as petitioners are
\n\tentitled the benefit of recommendation made by 4th and
\n\t5th Pay Commission.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the above observation and direction, present petitions are
\n\tdisposed of. Rule in each  petition is made absolute in terms
\n\tindicated hereinabove with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
Direct
\n\tservice is permitted.\n<\/p>\n
However,
\n\tin case, if, ultimate decision of the respondent – authority is
\n\tagainst the petitioner, it is open for the petitioner to challenge
\n\tthe same before appropriate forum in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
[H.K.\n<\/p>\n
RATHOD, J.]<\/p>\n
Vyas<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011 Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/10506\/2002 12\/ 12 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10506 of 2002 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10466 of 2002 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12577 of 2003 with […]<\/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-221759","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMaganbhai vs State on 21 March, 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\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-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=\"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-03T07:31:14+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-03T07:31:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1612,\"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\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\",\"name\":\"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-03T07:31:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 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":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 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\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-03T07:31:14+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-03T07:31:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011"},"wordCount":1612,"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\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011","name":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-03T07:31:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/maganbhai-vs-state-on-21-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Maganbhai vs State on 21 March, 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\/221759","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=221759"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221759\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221759"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221759"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221759"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}