{"id":22255,"date":"2008-06-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008"},"modified":"2017-12-03T03:26:23","modified_gmt":"2017-12-02T21:56:23","slug":"thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008<\/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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/8316\/2008\t 10\/ 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\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8316 of 2008\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nTHAKORE\nJAHAJI AMRAJI & 5 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT THRO. SECRETARY, & 12 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nH.S.MULIA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1\n- 6. \nMR KRUNAL D PANDYA, AGP for\nRespondent(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Respondent(s) : 2 -\n13. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \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: 19\/06\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
1.\tHeard
\nlearned advocate Mr. H.S. Mulia appearing on behalf of petitioners
\nand learned AGP Mr. Pandya appearing on behalf of respondent ?
\nState Authority.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tLearned
\nadvocate Mr. Mulia submitted that this Court has passed an order in
\ngroup of petitions being Special Civil Application No.2307 of 2008 to
\nSpecial Civil Application No.2361 of 2008 on 7th February
\n2008, where, this Court has directed to respondents to re-engage the
\npetitioners and to provide work to petitioners as a daily wagers on
\nthe same terms and conditions on which they were earlier working with
\nthe respondents. He also submitted that this being an identical
\npetition of same group and the workmen and therefore, identical order
\nmay be passed.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tTherefore,
\nfollowing order is passed by this Court :\n<\/p>\n
4.\tAs
\nper the case of the petitioners herein, their services were
\nterminated by the respondents on15.9.1999. Therefore, they filed
\npetitions before this Court being Special Civil Application Nos.
\n12255 of 2001 and 10162 to 10344 of 2002 wherein this court directed
\non 22.4.2003 to raise an industrial dispute against the termination.
\nAccordingly, disputes were raised by the petitioners and were
\nreferred to for adjudication to the Labour Court, Kalol being
\nReference No. 246\/03 to 300\/03 and 301\/03 to 413\/03, in all, total
\n168 references were made by the petitioners and other employees.
\nLabour Court, Kalol decided all the said references on 23.1.2004 and
\ndeclared that the termination in question is illegal and not granted
\nactual reinstatement and back wages for interim period but directed
\nthe first party establishment Dharoi Canal Irrigation  Executive
\nEngineer Division-1 and Executive Engineer Division-3 Visnagar to
\nprepare the seniority list of those who are entitled to work and
\nthereafter, if any work is available under the control of the
\nExecutive Engineer,  Division-1 and Division-3,  then they should
\nhave to be given the work on the same terms and conditions on which
\nthey were working with the respondents. Said award of the labour
\ncourt was challenged by the petitioners as well as the present
\nrespondents before this court by filing Special Civil Application
\nNos. 6828 of 2004 with Special Civil Application No. 8067 of 2004
\nwith Special Civil Application No. 7649 of 2004 to 7816 of 2004 with
\nSpecial Civil Application NO. 15208 of 2005 to 15327 of 2005 with
\nSpecial Civil Application No. 15329 of 2005 to 15340 of 2005 which
\nwere decided by this court (Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.R.Shah,J.) by
\ncommon oral CAV Judgment dated 10.5.2005. In the said group of
\npetitions filed by the petitioners and the State, at page 140, para
\n18 sub para 14, a concession was given by the learned Additional AG
\nwith regard to the directions issued by the labour court for
\npreparation of the seniority list etc. Said directions were not
\ndisturbed as held by the learned Single Judge. However, learned
\nSingle Judge of this Court has come to the conclusion that there is
\nno breach of section 25F,G or H of the ID Act, 1947 and the workmen
\nwere also not completing 240 days continuous service. In view of such
\nconclusion, petitions filed by the State were partly allowed
\naccordingly as regards breach of section 25F,G and H Of the ID Act,
\n1947 and continuous service as per section 25B of the ID Act by
\nsetting aside those findings given by the labour court and
\naccordingly, petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed by the
\nlearned Single Judge of this Court. Superintending Engineer,Sujlam
\nSuflam Circle No.2, Mehsana has, as per letter date 21.11.2007 page
\n143, given details to the Under Secretary where, according to him,
\nafter giving all the details of existing posts, item in respect of
\ndaily wager page 144, according to him, in all 198 daily wagers are
\nrequired against the sanctioned posts of 127 and, therefore, 71 posts
\nare required to be created additionally and there is no surplus
\nemployee available in his office. Page 145 is a letter written by the
\nAdministrative Manager, Gujarat Water Resources Development
\nCorporation dated 4.12.2007 addressed to the Chief Election
\nCommissioner, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar wherein item 3 is relating
\nto the Superintending Engineer, Palanpur Irrigation Circle,Palanpur
\nand establishment of 150 Rojamdar has been demanded by the
\nAdministrative Authority of the Gujarat Water Resources Development
\nCorporation Limited. Thereafter, seniority list was prepared on
\n29.11.2007 by the respondents Superintending Engineer, Sujlam Suflam
\nCircle II Mehsana. Learned Advocate Mr. Mulia for the petitioner has
\nplaced on record two orders passed by this Court in SCA No. 3588 of
\n1995 and 3863 of 1995 and 3864 of 1995 dated 16.2.2004 wherein,
\nsimilar award was passed by the labour court not granting
\nreinstatement and ultimately petitions were filed before this Court
\nand after considering the submissions made by the learned advocates
\nfor both the sides, this court has issued the following directions as
\nper page 166:\n<\/p>\n
\t?SIn
\n\tview of above discussion, the respondents are  directed that now
\n\tonwards if any work is pending with the respondents  where
\n\tadditional  daily rated employees are required or any future new
\n\tproject\/work  or existing work,  whenever  the  daily rated workers
\n\tare required by the respondents, they shall give first  priority  to
\n\t the petitioners  herein  while  intimating  them  in  writing
\n\tseeking their willingness  to  report  on  work  and  the workmen
\n\tconcerned  are  ready  and prepared to report on work, they shall be
\n\tgiven first  priority  to  employ  on such work site and so long the
\n\twork remain, they shall be made continued  in  service. The
\n\trespondents are also directed not to engage any  other  workman
\n\texcept  first engaging  the  workmen herein which, in my opinion,
\n\twould also satisfy the requirement of Section 25-H of the  I.D.
\n\t Act,  1947 and would meet the ends of justice between the parties.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt
\n\tis  also made clear that so long the work is available with the
\n\trespondents, no artificial break shall be given to any of the
\n\tworkmen herein.?S<\/p>\n
5.\tThereafter,
\nin similar circumstances, learned Advocate Mr. HS Mulia for the
\npetitioenrs has annexed order of this Court dated 22nd
\nMarch, 2007 in SPECIAL
\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 7491 of 2007 With  SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION
\nNo. 7710 of 2007 to SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8071 of 2007
\nwherein also daily wagers about more than 565 were working with the
\nrespondents. Ultimately, after considering various aspects of the
\nmatter and back ground, following order was passed by this Court :\n<\/p>\n
\t?S9.\tIn
\n\tview of this back ground and detailed legal fight which ultimately
\n\tresulted in nil, looking to the case of the petitioner, it is the
\n\tduty of the State authority to consider case of petitioners, those
\n\twho are without work since 15\/20 years, for re-engagement.
\n\tPetitioners are having award in their favour wherein the termination
\n\tis set aside. Therefore, though relief of reinstatement or
\n\tre-engagement has not been granted, since the termination has been
\n\tset aside, it automatically includes reinstatement and\/or
\n\tre-engagement but specific direction has not been issued by the
\n\tlabour court and, therefore, they are not able to move any machinery
\n\tfor implementation of the award.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.\tTherefore,
\n\tconsidering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the
\n\tsubmissions made by the learned Advocates for the parties, it is
\n\tdirected to the respondents to consider case of petitioners for
\n\tre-engagement of petitioners as daily wagers as and when work is
\n\tavailable at above referred places and also consider that these are
\n\tall tribal daily wagers not living in better condition in the
\n\tsociety and therefore, it is directed to the respondents to examine
\n\tgrievance of petitioners raised in their notice dated 7.12.2006 with
\n\tsympathetic approach purely on humanitarian ground and pass
\n\tappropriate reasoned order in accordance with law within three
\n\tmonths from the date of receipt of copy of this order and to
\n\tcommunicate same to the petitioners immediately thereafter.
\n\tTherefore, respondents are directed to consider case of petitioners
\n\twith sympathetic approach purely on humanitarian approach and to see
\n\tthat the petitioners may be able to get work in the near future from
\n\tthe respondents and to pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance
\n\twith law within three months from the date of receipt of copy this
\n\torder and to communicate decision to the petitioners immediately
\n\tthereafter. If the decision that may be taken by the respondents
\n\tpursuant to these directions is adverse to the petitioners, then, it
\n\twill be open for the petitioners to challenge the same before the
\n\tappropriate forum in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.Rule
\n\tin each of the petitions is made absolute in terms indicated herein
\n\tabove with no order as to costs. ??\n<\/p>\n
6.\tIt
\nis also required to be noted that the order of this court as referred
\nto above dated 22nd March, 2007 has been fully implemented
\nby the respondents by issuing orders dated 4th August,
\n2007 from the Under Secretary, Narmada Water Resources and Kalpasar
\nDepartment addressed to the Superintending Engineer, Ukai
\nCircle-C,Ukai, meaning thereby, about more than 300 employees have
\nbeen taken back as a daily wagers on the basis of the seniority list
\nprepared by the respondents. Therefore,learned Advocate Mr. HS Mulia
\nfor the petitioners submitted that when the vacancy is available and
\nthe work is also available with the respondents, then, it is the duty
\nof the State Authority to re-engage the petitioners by providing work
\nto them, those who are prepared to work at any place in any division
\nof the respondent on the same terms and conditions on which they were
\nearlier working. He also submits that the petitioners are old
\nworkmen, remained unemployed though seniority list is prepared on
\n29th November, 2007. He also submitted that instead of
\nproviding work to new strange daily wagers by the State Authority, it
\nis better that the old daily wagers are re-engaged by the State
\nAuthority and old employees are employed as daily wagers who were
\nworking since 1981, 1982 and 1983 who are still prepared to work with
\nthe respondents on the same terms and conditions and the State
\nAuthority should not discriminate them in the matter of their
\nre-engagement in the same capacity while providing work  because,
\notherwise, as per his submission, right under section 25H is also
\navailable to the petitioners. He submits that even if their
\ntermination has not been held to be violative of section 25F, G and H
\nand even if it has been held that they have not been completing 240
\ndays continuous service within the meaning of section 25B of the ID
\nAct, 1947 as held by the learned Single Judge of this Court, then
\nalso, their termination is covered by section 2(oo) of the ID Act.
\nSection 2(oo) of the ID Act, 1947 is reproduced as under:\n<\/p>\n
\t?S2(oo):\n<\/p>\n
\t‘retrenchment’ means the termination by the employer of the
\n\tservice of a workman for any reason whatsoever, otherwise, than as a
\n\tpunishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action, but does not
\n\tinclude-xxx??\n<\/p>\n
7.\tSo,
\ntermination of the petitioners is amounting to retrenchment within
\nthe meaning of section 2(oo) of the ID Act, 1947. It is  not
\nnecessary that unless the workman completes 240 days, then only, it
\nhas to be considered as retrenchment but any kind of termination
\nafter any kind of service, any number of days service would amount to
\nretrenchment and case of the petitioner is covered by section 2(oo)
\nof the ID Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tIf
\nany workman who has been retrenched by the employer has been
\ncompleting 240 days service, then, he would be entitled for the
\nprotection of section 25F of the ID Act, 1947 but if the retrenched
\nworkman is not entitled for such protection of section 25F of the ID
\nAct, 1947, then also, such workman would be the retrenched employee
\nas per section 2(oo)of the ID Act, 1947 and in case when new employee
\nis to be taken by the respondent authority as a daily wager, such
\nretrenched workman will be having legal right under section 25H of
\nthe ID Act. Section 25H of the ID Act, 1947 is providing for
\nre-employment of retrenched workmen. Same is quoted as under:\n<\/p>\n
\t?S25-H.\n<\/p>\n
\tRe-employment of retrenched workmen.- Where any workmen are
\n\tretrenched and the employer proposes to take into his employ any
\n\tpersons, he shall, in such manner as may be prescribed, give an
\n\topportunity to the retrenched workmen who are citizens of India to
\n\toffer themselves for re-employment, and such retrenched workmen who
\n\toffer themselves for re-employment shall have preference over other
\n\tpersons.??\n<\/p>\n
9.\tTherefore,
\nconsidering the provisions of section 25H of the ID Act, 1947,
\nretrenched workmen are entitled for preference over other persons
\nwithout considering as to whether they are entitled for protection
\nunder section 25F of the ID Act, 1947 or not. Such preferential
\ntreatment under sec. 25H  has no connection whatsoever with the
\nprotection of section 25F of the ID Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n
10.\t\tA
\nstatement was made by the learned Advocate Mr. HS Mulia before this
\ncourt that the petitioners are prepared to work at any place in any
\ndivision  on the same terms and conditions on which they were working
\nearlier.\n<\/p>\n
11.\t\tTherefore,
\nconsidering the submissions made by the learned Advocate Mr. HS Mulia
\non behalf of the petitioners and also considering the submissions
\nmade by the learned AGP Ms. Chandarana and other AGPs on behalf of
\nthe State Authority and also considering the various orders annexed
\nby the petitioners to the petition as per which it is clear that
\ncertain posts of daily wagers are vacant and work is available with
\nthe respondent authority, it is directed to the respondents to
\nre-engage the petitioners in any division including Palanpur, Mehsana
\nor nearby Division, if the work is available and vacancies are
\navailable, and then to re-engage the petitioners and to  provide work
\nto the petitioners as daily wagers on the same terms and conditions
\non which they were earlier working with the respondents. It is
\ndirected to the respondents to complete the exercise within the
\nperiod of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order as
\nthe petitioners are prepared to work in any division where ever work
\nis available with the respondents, therefore, to pass appropriate
\norders for re-engagement of the petitioners and to provide work to
\nthem as daily wagers where ever work is available with them in any
\ndivision within the period of one month from the date of receipt of
\ncopy of this order and inform the petitioners accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
12.\t\tWith
\nthese observations and directions, the petition is disposed of
\nwithout expressing any opinion on merits of the matter.\n<\/p>\n
13.\t\tDirect
\nservice is permitted  today.\n<\/p>\n
[H.K.\n<\/p>\n
RATHOD, J.]<\/p>\n
#Dave<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/8316\/2008 10\/ 12 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8316 of 2008 ========================================================= THAKORE JAHAJI AMRAJI & 5 – Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT THRO. SECRETARY, & 12 – […]<\/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-22255","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-02T21:56:23+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\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-02T21:56:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2347,\"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\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-02T21:56:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/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":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-02T21:56:23+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\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-02T21:56:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008"},"wordCount":2347,"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\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008","name":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-02T21:56:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thakore-vs-state-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Thakore vs State on 19 June, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/22255","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=22255"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22255\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22255"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22255"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22255"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}