{"id":236026,"date":"2008-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008"},"modified":"2019-03-08T23:39:09","modified_gmt":"2019-03-08T18:09:09","slug":"r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honble Smt. Kumari,&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\nLPA\/75120\/2008\t 8\/ 8\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 751 of 2008\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8130 of 2008\n \n\nWith \nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 8747 of\n2008 \n=====================================================\n \n\nR\nM CHAUHAN - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nVICE\nCHANCELLOR- S.D. AGRICUL-TURAL UNIVERSITY &amp; 3 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=====================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMrs.Sangita\nPahwa for M\/S THAKKAR ASSOC. for Appellant \nMR\nMITUL K SHELAT for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 \nMR GM JOSHI for\nRespondent No.\n4 \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 A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHON'BLE\n\t\t\tSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 30\/07\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\nappellant working as a Professor with the respondent-University was<br \/>\ngiven additional charge of the Principal by order dated 30-4-2007,<br \/>\nAnnexure  E  to the petition. Earlier that charge was given to<br \/>\nrespondent No.4. At a later point of time i.e. on 10-6-2008, an order<br \/>\nwas passed whereby additional charge of the Principal was withdrawn<br \/>\nfrom the petitioner and was directed to hand it over  to respondent<br \/>\nNo.4 by order Annexure  A . The petitioner aggrieved thereby<br \/>\napproached this Court by preferring Special Civil Application No.8130<br \/>\nof 2008. The said petition came to be dismissed by an order dated<br \/>\n9-7-2008 and hence this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\ngrievance of the appellant is that the impugned order is passed on a<br \/>\npremise that the respondent No.4 is senior to the petitioner, whereas<br \/>\nin fact the respondent No.4 is junior to him in the cadre of<br \/>\nProfessor, although respondent No.4 was appointed as Professor<br \/>\n(Promotee) under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS), which is not a<br \/>\npromotion. Respondent No.4 in fact entered the cadre of Professor in<br \/>\nthe year 2006 whereas the petitioner entered the said cadre in 2005<br \/>\nby direct recruitment and, therefore, earlier seniority could not<br \/>\nhave been considered. The appellant&#8217;s grievance, therefore, is that<br \/>\nby passing the impugned order, purporting to be an order withdrawing<br \/>\ncharge, a substantive right of seniority is determined by<br \/>\nrespondents-authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe<br \/>\ncase of the respondents-authorities i.e. respondents No.1 to 3 is<br \/>\nthat though there is a reference to seniority in the impugned order,<br \/>\nrespondents-authorities never intended and have in fact not decided<br \/>\nthe question of inter se seniority between the petitioner and the<br \/>\nrespondent No.4. The charge has been withdrawn and directed to be<br \/>\nhanded over to respondent No.4 on account of administrative exigency.<br \/>\nThe administrative exigency is explained by stating that the<br \/>\npetitioner was holding two additional charges whereas respondent No.4<br \/>\ndid not hold any charge and, therefore, one charge is withdrawn from<br \/>\nthe petitioner-appellant and directed to be handed over to respondent<br \/>\nNo.4, to balance the work-load.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tLearned<br \/>\nsingle Judge, after considering the rival submissions, concluded that<br \/>\nthe Court is not determining inter se seniority or even seniority of<br \/>\ncadre of Professor but only the question of right of the petitioner<br \/>\nto hold additional charge of Principal. Learned single Judge was<br \/>\nsatisfied that administrative exigency is explained by the<br \/>\nrespondent-University and necessity of assigning charge to respondent<br \/>\nNo.4 and, therefore, the action of the respondents-authorities cannot<br \/>\nbe said to be unreasonable, arbitrary, unfair or non-transparent and<br \/>\nviolative of Article 14 of Constitution of India or in contravention<br \/>\nof the law laid down in <a href=\"\/doc\/1803208\/\">Dr.J.N.Banavalikar v. Municipal<br \/>\nCorporation of Delhi and<\/a> another, AIR 1996 SC 326 and dismissed<br \/>\nthe petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard learned  advocate Mrs.Sangita Pahwa for the appellant,<br \/>\nMr.Mitul K.Shelat for respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr.G.M.Joshi for<br \/>\nrespondent No.4.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tMrs.Pahwa<br \/>\nhas raised the same contentions as narrated above and has submitted<br \/>\nthat the cadre of Professor (Direct Recruit) and cadre of Professor<br \/>\n(Promotion) are two distinct cadres and, therefore, inter se<br \/>\nseniority is not comparable. That apart, the conduct of the<br \/>\nRespondent-University does indicate that the petitioner was senior<br \/>\nand by impugned order the University has deviated from its past<br \/>\npractice of handing over charge of the Principal to the senior most<br \/>\nProfessor. She submitted that the respondents-authorities have not<br \/>\nstated anything about administrative exigency in the impugned order<br \/>\nand now that stand cannot be taken by the other side. The order is<br \/>\nfounded mainly on seniority thereby. It was submitted by Mrs.Pahwa<br \/>\nthat when question of seniority would arise in future, this order<br \/>\nwould stare in the face of the petitioner and may damage his case.<br \/>\nEven otherwise, in absence of bonafides, the charge could not have<br \/>\nbeen withdrawn from the petitioner. She submitted, therefore, that<br \/>\nthe appeal may be entertained.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tLearned<br \/>\n advocate Mr.Shealt states at the outset that the<br \/>\nrespondents-authorities have no intention and have in fact not<br \/>\ndecided the question of inter se seniority between the petitioner and<br \/>\nrespondent No.4. He also submitted that the impugned order is only in<br \/>\nrespect of  withdrawal and handing over of charge and that was based<br \/>\non administrative exigency, explained in the affidavit in reply. The<br \/>\npetitioner-appellant has no substantive or fundamental right to hold<br \/>\nthe additional charge and, therefore, the petition has rightly been<br \/>\nrejected by the learned  single Judge. Thus,no interference is called<br \/>\nfor  and the appeal may, therefore, be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tMr.Joshi<br \/>\nhas also made a statement at the Bar that respondent No.4 does not<br \/>\nclaim and would not claim any seniority over the petitioner on the<br \/>\nbasis of this order, as stated by the respondent No.4 in his<br \/>\naffidavit-in-reply.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tWe<br \/>\nhave considered the submissions made by the learned  advocates for<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIn<br \/>\nour view, the impugned order is basically an order withdrawing<br \/>\nadditional charge from the petitioner and handing it over to<br \/>\nrespondent No.4, but the reasonings given for passing the order had<br \/>\ngenerated an apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that by this<br \/>\norder his seniority is also determined. But it is stated in the<br \/>\naffidavit-in-reply as well as a statement is made by learned advocate<br \/>\nMr.Shelat at the Bar that the University did not intent nor has it<br \/>\ndetermined the question of inter se seniority between the petitioner<br \/>\nand respondent No.4 and rightly so, because in our opinion, by<br \/>\nimpugned order that question is not decided.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tOnce<br \/>\nthe question of seniority gets detached from the impugned order, the<br \/>\norder  remains is that of withdrawing  additional charge from the<br \/>\npetitioner. There does not appear any rule that charge of the<br \/>\nPrincipal has to be kept with the senior most Professor though there<br \/>\nmay be a practice. But this being a purely administrative question,<br \/>\nit is within the domain of the authorities at the realm of the<br \/>\naffairs to determine to whom to hand over the charge and once it is<br \/>\nfound that the order does not smell of any malafide, it is not proper<br \/>\nto subject such an order to a judicial review. It would not be<br \/>\nappropriate for us to go into the question of nature of<br \/>\nadministrative exigency and we, therefore, do not go into it.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tUnder<br \/>\nthe circumstances, we do not find any merit in the appeal. Appeal<br \/>\nstands dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>CIVIL<br \/>\nAPPLICATION No. 8747 of 2008<\/p>\n<p>\tIn<br \/>\nthe light of dismissal of appeal, the Civil Application does not<br \/>\nsurvive and stands disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>  (A.L.Dave,J)<\/p>\n<p>   \t\t           (Smt.Abhilasha<br \/>\nKumari,J)<\/p>\n<p>arg<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honble Smt. Kumari,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA\/75120\/2008 8\/ 8 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 751 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8130 of 2008 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8747 of 2008 [&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-236026","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>R vs Vice on 30 July, 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\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-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=\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-08T18:09:09+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-08T18:09:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1108,\"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\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\",\"name\":\"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-08T18:09:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R vs Vice on 30 July, 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":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 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\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-08T18:09:09+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-08T18:09:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008"},"wordCount":1108,"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\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008","name":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-08T18:09:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-vs-vice-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R vs Vice on 30 July, 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\/236026","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=236026"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236026\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236026"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236026"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236026"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}