{"id":222526,"date":"2000-04-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-04-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000"},"modified":"2016-05-01T05:23:45","modified_gmt":"2016-04-30T23:53:45","slug":"govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","title":{"rendered":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Ahmad<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: D.P.Wadhwa, S.S.Ahmad<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nGOVIND A.  MANE &amp; ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t05\/04\/2000\n\nBENCH:\nD.P.Wadhwa, S.S.Ahmad\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>      S.SAGHIR AHMAD, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Leave granted.  The appellants after having passed the<br \/>\n12th Examination, with a percentage of marks ranging from 63<br \/>\nto  65%, sought admission in B.Ed Course.  But they were not<br \/>\nsuccessful and, consequently, they approached the High Court<br \/>\nunder  Article\t226 of the Constitution and  challenged\t the<br \/>\nselection  of candidates for admission on the grounds, inter<br \/>\nalia, that the districtwise distribution of seats among four<br \/>\ndistricts,  namely, Parbhani, Nanded, Beed and Latur to\t the<br \/>\nextent\tof  200\t seats, 460 seats, 310 seats and  640  seats<br \/>\nrespectively,  was bad.\t The Writ Petition was dismissed  by<br \/>\nthe High Court by its judgment dated 24.6.1997 against which<br \/>\nthe  present appeal has been filed.  Learned counsel for the<br \/>\nappellants  has contended that admission to B.Ed Course\t was<br \/>\nbased  on  a  common  admission\t test  and,  therefore,\t the<br \/>\ndistribution of seats to different districts was bad.  It is<br \/>\ncontended that a common merit list should have been prepared<br \/>\nand,  on  that basis, admission should have been allowed  to<br \/>\nthe  students  who figured in the merit list.  The  question<br \/>\nwhether\t there could be a districtwise distribution of seats<br \/>\nwas  considered\t by  this  Court in the\t case  of  <a href=\"\/doc\/1342109\/\">Minor  P.<br \/>\nRajendran  vs.\tState of Madras and Others, AIR<\/a> 1968 SC 1012<br \/>\n=  1968 (2) SCR 786, and it was held that for the purpose of<br \/>\nadmission to the First Year Integrated M.B.B.S.\t Course, the<br \/>\ndistrictwise  distribution of seats was violative of Article<br \/>\n14  of\tthe Constitution.  It was, inter alia,\tobserved  as<br \/>\nunder:-\t &#8220;(11) The question whether districtwise  allocation<br \/>\nis violative of Article 14 will depend on what is the object<br \/>\nto  be\tachieved  in  the matter  of  admission\t to  medical<br \/>\ncolleges.   Considering\t the  fact that there  is  a  larger<br \/>\nnumber of candidates than seats available, selection has got<br \/>\nto  be made.  The object of selection can only be to  secure<br \/>\nthe best possible material for admission to colleges subject<br \/>\nto  the\t provision for socially and  educationally  backward<br \/>\nclasses.  Further whether selection is from the socially and<br \/>\neducationally backward classes or from the general pool, the<br \/>\nobject\tof  selection  must be to secure the  best  possible<br \/>\ntalent from the two sources.  If that is the object, it must<br \/>\nnecessarily  follow  that that object would be\tdefeated  if<br \/>\nseats  are allocated district by district.  It cannot be and<br \/>\nhas  not  been\tdenied that the object of  selection  is  to<br \/>\nsecure the best possible talent from the two sources so that<br \/>\nthe  country may have the best possible doctors.  If that is<br \/>\nthe    object,\t  the\targument    on\t behalf\t   of\t the<br \/>\npetitioners\/appellant is that that object cannot possibly be<br \/>\nserved\tby  allocating seats districtwise.  It is true\tthat<br \/>\nArticle\t  14  does  not\t  forbid  classification,  but\t the<br \/>\nclassification has to be justified on the basis of the nexus<br \/>\nbetween\t the  classification and the object to be  achieved,<br \/>\neven  assuming\tthat  territorial classification  may  be  a<br \/>\nreasonable  classification.   The  fact\t  however  that\t the<br \/>\nclassification\tby  itself  is reasonable is not  enough  to<br \/>\nsupport\t it unless there is nexus between the classification<br \/>\nand  the object to be achieved.\t Therefore, as the object to<br \/>\nbe  achieved  in  a  case  of the kind\twith  which  we\t are<br \/>\nconcerned  is  to  get\tthe best  talent  for  admission  to<br \/>\nprofessional  colleges, the allocation of seats districtwise<br \/>\nhas  no reasonable relation with the object to be  achieved.<br \/>\nIf  anything,  such allocation will result in many cases  in<br \/>\nthe  object  being  destroyed,\tand  if\t that  is  so,\t the<br \/>\nclassification,\t  even\tif  reasonable,\t  would\t result\t  in<br \/>\ndiscrimination, inasmuch as better qualified candidates from<br \/>\none district may be rejected while less qualified candidates<br \/>\nfrom  other districts may be admitted from either of the two<br \/>\nsources.&#8221;   This  decision  was\t  followed  in\t<a href=\"\/doc\/291633\/\">(Minor)\t  A.<br \/>\nPeriakaruppan  vs.  State of Tamil Nadu &amp; Ors., AIR<\/a> 1971  SC<br \/>\n2303  = 1972 (2) SCR 430 = (1971) 1 SCC 38, in which it\t was<br \/>\nlaid  down  as\tunder:-\t &#8220;Before  a  classification  can  be<br \/>\njustified,  it\tmust be based on an objective  criteria\t and<br \/>\nfurther\t it  must  have\t reasonable nexus  with\t the  object<br \/>\nintended to be achieved.  The object intended to be achieved<br \/>\nin  the\t present case is to select the best  candidates\t for<br \/>\nbeing  admitted to Medical Colleges.  That object cannot  be<br \/>\nsatisfactorily\t achieved  by  the   method  adopted.\t The<br \/>\ncomplaint  of the petitioners is that unitwise\tdistribution<br \/>\nof   seats   is\t but  a\t different  manifestation   of\t the<br \/>\ndistrictwise  distribution sought in 1967-68 has some  force<br \/>\nthough on the material on record we will not be justified in<br \/>\nsaying\t that  the  unitwise   distribution  was  done\t for<br \/>\ncollateral  purposes.\tSuffice it to say that the  unitwise<br \/>\ndistribution  of  seats is violative of Arts.  14 and 15  of<br \/>\nthe  Constitution.   The fact that an applicant is  free  to<br \/>\napply  to any one unit does not take the scheme outside\t the<br \/>\nmischief of Arts.  14 and 15.  It may be remembered that the<br \/>\nstudents  were\tadvised as far as possible to apply  to\t the<br \/>\nunit  nearest  to their place of residence.&#8221; The law,  thus,<br \/>\nhaving\tbeen laid down clearly by this Court, the High Court<br \/>\nwas not justified in dismissing the Writ Petition.  Since it<br \/>\nis  not disputed by the respondents that for the purpose  of<br \/>\nadmission   to\t B.Ed  Course,\t  seats\t  were\t distributed<br \/>\ndistrictwise  without  indicating any material to  show\t the<br \/>\nnexus  between such distribution and the object sought to be<br \/>\nachieved,  it  would  be  violative of\tArticle\t 14  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution.\tUnfortunately,\tthe whole matter relates  to<br \/>\nthe  year  1995 and, today, after a lapse of five years,  it<br \/>\nwould  not be possible to direct that the appellants may  be<br \/>\nadmitted  in  B.Ed Course.  All that can be said is that  if<br \/>\nany  further  steps are taken by the respondents  for  fresh<br \/>\nadmission  to  B.Ed  Course, the appellants should  also  be<br \/>\ngiven  an opportunity to seek admission in that Course.\t The<br \/>\nappeal\tis, therefore, dismissed but without any order as to<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 Author: S Ahmad Bench: D.P.Wadhwa, S.S.Ahmad PETITIONER: GOVIND A. MANE &amp; ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/04\/2000 BENCH: D.P.Wadhwa, S.S.Ahmad JUDGMENT: S.SAGHIR AHMAD, J. Leave granted. The appellants after having [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-222526","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - 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\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\" \/>\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=\"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\"},\"wordCount\":990,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\",\"name\":\"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000\"}]},{\"@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":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - 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\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000","datePublished":"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000"},"wordCount":990,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000","name":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-30T23:53:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govind-a-mane-ors-vs-state-of-maharashtra-ors-on-5-april-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Govind A. Mane &amp; Ors vs State Of Maharashtra &amp; Ors on 5 April, 2000"}]},{"@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\/222526","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=222526"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222526\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=222526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=222526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=222526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}