{"id":235155,"date":"2008-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"modified":"2018-09-22T00:35:56","modified_gmt":"2018-09-21T19:05:56","slug":"purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/12956\/2008\t 4\/ 4\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. 12956 of 2008\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nPURSHOTAM\nSADABHAI SOLANKI - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nBS BRAHMBHATT for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR JK SHAH, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Respondent(s) : 2 -\n3. \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 KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 23\/10\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tBy<br \/>\nway of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated<br \/>\n7\/10\/2008 passed by the respondent authority whereby the petitioner<br \/>\nis put under suspension.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tBrief<br \/>\nfacts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on 18\/2\/1980<br \/>\nas Talati cum mantri in the respondent department.  Time and again<br \/>\npetitioner was transferred and at present petitioner is in-charge of<br \/>\nthe village Mahuvana, Shivgadh and Dora situated in Kutch district.<br \/>\nThe petitioner was suspended on 1\/12\/1984 because he was trapped in<br \/>\none ACB Case filed against him.  However, on 18\/121996 he was<br \/>\nreinstated to his original post.  The State Government had preferred<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No,209 of 1997 which is admitted and pending.<br \/>\nBecause of pendency of appeal, petitioner was not granted higher pay<br \/>\nscale and increments.  The petitioner has made representation to his<br \/>\nsuperior to grant such benefits but the same are not yet paid.<br \/>\nThereafter ultimately by order dated 7\/10\/2008, the petitioner was<br \/>\nsuspended by the respondent authority against which present petition<br \/>\nhas been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is<br \/>\nillegal and arbitrary and mala fide.  The petitioner has submitted<br \/>\nthat the impugned order in violation of principles of natural<br \/>\njustice.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate for the respondent submitted that the order is just and<br \/>\nproper and no interference is required.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHeard<br \/>\nthe learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the<br \/>\nrecord.  In my view suspension is a right of an employer and in view<br \/>\nof serious allegations made in the order, I am of the view that it is<br \/>\nfor the administration to decide as to what action is required to be<br \/>\ntaken.  In that view of the matter, this is not a case where exercise<br \/>\nof powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is<br \/>\nwarranted.  Malafides are alleged against the Taluka Development<br \/>\nOfficer (TDO) but the oder is not passed by the TDO but the order is<br \/>\npassed by the District Development Officer (DDO).\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThis<br \/>\nCourt is of the view that concept of bias and malafide are without<br \/>\nany basis in view of the decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in the<br \/>\ncase of Abrahim Kuruvila vs. S.C.T. Institute of Medical Sciences<br \/>\n&amp; Technology and others, reported in (2005) 9 SCC 49 and in<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1994790\/\">State of Panjab vs. V.K.Khanna and others<\/a>, reported<br \/>\nin (2001) 2 SCC 330.  Para-5 of the decision in the case of State of<br \/>\nPanjab (supra) reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t?SPara-5.\tWhereas<br \/>\nfairness is synonymous with reasonableness- bias stands included<br \/>\nwithin the attributes and broader purview of the word ?Smalice??<br \/>\nwhich in common acceptation means and implies ?Sspite?? or ?Sill<br \/>\nwill??.  One redeeming feature in the matter of attributing bias or<br \/>\nmalice and is now well settled that mere general statements will not<br \/>\nbe sufficient for the purposes of indication of ill will.  There must<br \/>\nbe cogent evidence available on record to come to the conclusion as<br \/>\nto whether in fact, there was existing a bias or a mala fide move<br \/>\nwhich results in the miscarriage of justice (see in this context<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/830194\/\">Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Girja Shankar Pant).  In<\/a> almost all<br \/>\nlegal inquiries, ?Sintention as distinguished from motive is the<br \/>\nall-important factor?? and in common parlance a malicious act stands<br \/>\nequated with an intentional act without just cause or excuse.  In the<br \/>\ncase of Jones Bros. (Hunstanton) Ltd. v. Stevens the Court of Appeal<br \/>\nhas stated upon reliance on the decision of Lumley v. Gye as below:\n<\/p>\n<p>?SFor this purpose<br \/>\nmaliciously means no more than knowingly.  This was distinctly laid<br \/>\ndown in Lumley v. Gye where Crompton, J. said that it was clear law<br \/>\nthat a person who wrongfully and maliciously, or , which is the same<br \/>\nthing, with notice interrupts the relation of master and servant by<br \/>\nharbouring and keeping the servant after he has quitted his master<br \/>\nduring his period of service, commits a wrongful act for which he is<br \/>\nresponsible in law.  Malice in law means the doing of a wrongful act<br \/>\nintentionally without just cause or excuse: Bromage v. Prosser.<br \/>\n&#8216;Intentionally&#8217; refers to the doing of the act; it does not mean that<br \/>\nthe defendant meant to be spiteful, though sometimes, as for instance<br \/>\nto rebut a plea of privilege in defamation, malice in fact has to be<br \/>\nproved.????\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tIn<br \/>\nthe premises aforesaid, no case is made out to interfere.  Petition<br \/>\nis therefore dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(K.S.JHAVERI,<br \/>\nJ.) <\/p>\n<p>(ila)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/12956\/2008 4\/ 4 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12956 of 2008 ========================================================= PURSHOTAM SADABHAI SOLANKI &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 2 &#8211; Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-235155","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - 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\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-21T19:05:56+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-21T19:05:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":740,\"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\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-21T19:05:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 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":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - 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\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-21T19:05:56+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-21T19:05:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"wordCount":740,"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\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","name":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-21T19:05:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/purshotam-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Purshotam vs State on 23 October, 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\/235155","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=235155"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235155\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235155"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235155"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235155"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}