{"id":246989,"date":"2010-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010"},"modified":"2018-10-20T00:09:52","modified_gmt":"2018-10-19T18:39:52","slug":"arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010<\/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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/5039\/2010\t 6\/ 6\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. 5039 of 2010\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 5099 of 2010\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nARUN\nHARILAL KATBAMNA &amp; 5 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nEXECUTIVE\nENGINEER &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nTR MISHRA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1 - 6. \nMR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \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\/07\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioners have prayed as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>[B]\tYOUR<br \/>\nLORDSHIP may be pleased to issue aw rit in the nature of certiorary<br \/>\nor in the nature of mandamus and\/or any other appropriate writ, order<br \/>\nor direction quashing and setting aside the impugned circular dated<br \/>\n8th April, 2010 (Annexure-D tot his petition) being<br \/>\narbitrary, discriminatory, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the<br \/>\nConstitution of India and also be further pleased to declare and hold<br \/>\nthe impugned action of stopping the provident fund contribution as<br \/>\nillegal and against the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n<p>[C]\tYOUR<br \/>\nLORDSHIP may be pleased to issue a direction or order restraining the<br \/>\nrespondents, their agents and servants from implementing, executing<br \/>\nand operating the said circular dated 8thApril 2010, Public Health<br \/>\nDivision1, Juangadh (Annexure-D to this petition).\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mishra, learned Advocate for the petitioners has relied upon a<br \/>\njudgement oft his Court dated 15th March 2010 passed in<br \/>\nSpecial Civil Application No.10815 of 2009, which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\nlearned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner has challenged the order passed by PF Authority dated 30th<br \/>\nJune 2009 under Sec.16(1)(b) of the PF Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr. Rathod submitted that there is a CPF Scheme in existence<br \/>\nand casual labourers who are appointed after 30th November<br \/>\n1994 are not entitled to join CPF Scheme. He submitted that order<br \/>\npassed by PF Authority dated 30th June 2009 wherein it is<br \/>\nheld that though the Board is excluded establishment under provisions<br \/>\nof EPF Act, inspite of that, the Board is required to enroll all<br \/>\nemployees as PF members including daily rated employee. He submitted<br \/>\nthat this direction is contrary to provisions of Sec.16(1)(b) of PF<br \/>\nAct. He submitted that according to aforesaid provision, the Board is<br \/>\nunder the control of State Government and having contributory<br \/>\nprovident fund scheme for his employees, therefore, PF Authority has<br \/>\nno jurisdiction to issue such kind of direction in respect of daily<br \/>\nrated employees and casual employees those who have been appointed<br \/>\nsubsequent to 30th November 1994. Therefo9re, PF Authority<br \/>\nhas committed gross error.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr. Pathak appearing on behalf of Union submitted that SCA<br \/>\n3481 of 2008 was filed by respondent No.2 Union before this Court<br \/>\nwherein on 18th February 2009, direction has been issued<br \/>\nagainst Respondent No.2 PF Authority shall initiate inquiry in<br \/>\nconnection with the grievance of the person concern in that petition.<br \/>\nSuch inquiry will be initiated on or before 15th March<br \/>\n2009 and after hearing representative of the person concern in that<br \/>\npetition, respondent No.1 &#8211; Board to pass appropriate order or<br \/>\ntake appropriate steps to cover employees those who are not covered<br \/>\nby CPF Scheme appointed subsequent to 30th November 1994.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHe<br \/>\nsubmitted that in respect of aforesaid direction, further order has<br \/>\nbeen passed by this Court in SCA No.1183 of 2008 on 20th<br \/>\nFebruary 2009 where following order is passed :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;2.\tMr.Niral<br \/>\nR.Mehta, learned advocate for respondent No.2 for P.F.Authorties<br \/>\nsubmitted that so far as permanent employees of respondent No.1-GWS&amp;S<br \/>\nBoard are concerned, they would be covered by Board&#8217;s P.F. Scheme<br \/>\napplicable to the Board and its employees and the Board as well as<br \/>\nits permanent employees stand excluded \/ exempted under the<br \/>\nprovisions of Section 16 of the Act. However, so far as casual and<br \/>\nnon-permanent employees working in Board, who are not considered as<br \/>\nBoard&#8217;s employees by the Board, are concerned, they, probably, might<br \/>\nnot have been covered by the Board under its scheme \/ rules for P.F.<br \/>\nand that therefore, their cases may have to be examined by the<br \/>\nrespondent No.2. Mr.Rathod for respondent No.1-Board has not disputed<br \/>\nthat there may be some persons working in the Board on temporary or<br \/>\ncausal or ad-hoc basis or with the contractors who are not the<br \/>\nemployees of the Board and thus are not eligible to the benefits at<br \/>\npar with Board&#8217;s regular and permanent employees and are not covered<br \/>\nunder the board&#8217;s scheme \/ rules for P.F.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tMr.Pathak<br \/>\nlearned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that<br \/>\npersons concerned in this petition are continued in the respondent<br \/>\nNo.1-Board and are not being treated as permanent employees of the<br \/>\nBoard but they have been extended the benefit of G.R. Dated<br \/>\n17.10.1988. The grievance made by Mr.Pathak is that persons concerned<br \/>\nin the petition are, on one hand, not being treated as regular and<br \/>\npermanent employees of respondent No.1 -Board and therefore, benefit<br \/>\nof the PF scheme prevailing in the Board is not being extended to<br \/>\nthem and on the other hand the Provident Fund Department also does<br \/>\nnot cover such employees under the Scheme envisaged under the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Act and\/or does not require the Board to cover such<br \/>\nemployees at-least under the scheme under the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tMr.Pathak<br \/>\nsubmitted that in view of the said situation, the employees are left<br \/>\nhigh and dry and without benefit of P.F.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tMr.Mehta<br \/>\nhas further submitted that in light of  such submission, the<br \/>\ndepartment will conduct necessary inquiry, after issuing appropriate<br \/>\nnotices and hearing the concerned and interested parties and<br \/>\nthereafter, appropriate directions will be issued.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn<br \/>\nthis view of the matter, it is directed that the respondent No.2<br \/>\nshall initiate inquiry in connection with the grievance of the<br \/>\npersons concerned in this petition. Such inquiry will be initiated on<br \/>\nor before 30th  March, 2009 (i.e. an appropriate notices<br \/>\nwill be issued to the concerned parties on or before 30th<br \/>\nMarch, 2009). After hearing the representative\/s of the persons<br \/>\nconcerned in the petition and the respondent No.1-Board, the<br \/>\nrespondent No.2 shall endeavor to complete the investigation \/<br \/>\ninquiry preferably within a  period of 3 months i.e. on or before<br \/>\n30th June, 2009. If as a result of the inquiry, it is<br \/>\nfound that any default has been committed and the employees are<br \/>\nrequired to be covered under the provisions of the Act, then<br \/>\nappropriate steps will be taken by respondent No.2, immediately and<br \/>\nwithout any delay.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe<br \/>\nrespondent No.1-Board shall co-operate in the inquiry and all<br \/>\nnecessary and relevant documents which may be required or demanded by<br \/>\nthe respondent no.2 may be supplied by the respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tSo<br \/>\nfar as the relief\/s prayed for in Para 18(D) and 18(E) is\/are<br \/>\nconcerned, it is clarified that it would be open to and permissible<br \/>\nfor the concerned persons to take out appropriate proceedings before<br \/>\nappropriate forum\/Court in accordance with and as may be permissible<br \/>\nin law, and the said demands have not been examined by this Court, at<br \/>\nthis stage in this petition, on merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tWith<br \/>\nthe aforesaid observations and clarifications, the petition is<br \/>\ndisposed of. Direct service is permitted.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThereafter,<br \/>\nPF Authority has called the petitioner on 22nd April 2009<br \/>\nto remain present before PF Authority. The petitioner Board has made<br \/>\ntheir submission Annexure &#8216;E&#8217; &#8211; Page 26 to 29 dated 3rd<br \/>\nJune 2009. Thereafter, order has been passed by PF Authority on 30th<br \/>\nJune 2009 Annexure &#8216;F&#8217; Page 30.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tI<br \/>\nhave considered submissions made by all learned advocates appearing<br \/>\non behalf of respective parties. Section 16 of PF Act not to apply to<br \/>\ncertain establishments. Section 16(1) of PF Act is quoted as under :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Sec.16<br \/>\n: Act not to apply to<br \/>\ncertain establishments. &#8211; [(1)<br \/>\nThis Act shall not apply &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)\tto<br \/>\nany establishment registered under the Co-operative Societies Act,<br \/>\n1912 (2 of 1912), or under any other law for the time being in force<br \/>\nin any State relating to co-operative societies, employing less than<br \/>\nfifty persons and working without the aid of power; or <\/p>\n<p>[(b)<br \/>\nto any other establishment belonging to or under the control of the<br \/>\nCentral Government or a State Government and whose employees are<br \/>\nentitled to the benefit of contributory provident fund or old age<br \/>\npension in accordance with any scheme or rule framed by the Central<br \/>\nGovernment or the State Government governing such benefits; or<\/p>\n<p>(c)<br \/>\n\tto any other establishment set up under any Central, Provincial or<br \/>\nState Act and whose employees are entitled to the benefits of<br \/>\ncontributory provident fund or old age pension in accordance with any<br \/>\nscheme or rule framed under that Act governing such benefits;\t&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLooking<br \/>\nto aforesaid Section, the Act is not applicable if the establishment<br \/>\nbelongs under the control of State Government, but, PF Authority has<br \/>\nconsidered intention of the Act is very clear that only those State<br \/>\nGovernment Establishments are excluded whose employees are in<br \/>\nenjoyment of benefits in the nature of PF, Pension, Gratuity and such<br \/>\nbenefit should not be less favourable to such employees than the<br \/>\nbenefits provided under the Act. The definition of &#8217;employee&#8217; given<br \/>\nunder Sec.2(f)  as any person who is employed for wages in any kind<br \/>\nof work and who gets, wages directly and indirectly from the employer<br \/>\nand such employees is entitled and required to become a member of the<br \/>\nfunds under Sec.6 of the PF Scheme, 1952. Therefore, considering<br \/>\nrelevant Sec.16(1)(b) and Sec.2(f) definition of employee and Para 26<br \/>\nof the Employees&#8217; Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,<br \/>\n1952 which gives clear verdict that employees irrespective of its<br \/>\ncadre or kind of appointment is required to enroll as member of P.F.,<br \/>\ntherefore, accordingly, though petitioner Board excluded<br \/>\nestablishment, but, it requires to enroll all kinds of employees as<br \/>\nPF members including daily rated employees. Those who have been<br \/>\nrecruited or appointed or engaged subsequent to 30th<br \/>\nNovember 1994. Therefore, according to my opinion, PF Authority has<br \/>\nrightly examined the issue in light of directions issued by this<br \/>\nCourt as referred above and rightly considered Sec.16(1)(b) being an<br \/>\nexcluded establishment, but, so far daily rated employees\/ casual<br \/>\nemployees or any employees appointed subsequent to 30th<br \/>\nNovember 1994 are concerned, they are not covered by scheme which<br \/>\nimplemented by petitioner Board, because, it is very clear stand<br \/>\ntaken by petitioner that casual labourers who are appointed<br \/>\nsubsequent to 30th November 1994 are not entitled to join<br \/>\nCPF Scheme, therefore, such employees those who are not entitled to<br \/>\njoin CPF Scheme of board then naturally, they are covered by PF Act<br \/>\nand also satisfied definition of &#8217;employee&#8217; under Sec.2(f) of PF Act.<br \/>\nTherefore, contentions raised by learned advocate Mr. Mehul Rathod<br \/>\ncannot be accepted. The order passed by PF Authority is perfectly in<br \/>\nthe interest of justice, otherwise, casual employees those who are<br \/>\nrecruited or appointed or engaged after 30th November 1994<br \/>\ncannot be joined in CPF Scheme prevailing in Board which amounts to a<br \/>\ndiscrimination between two class of employees and PF protection is<br \/>\nnot made available, therefore, to that extent, order has been passed<br \/>\nby PF Authority being an implementation of beneficial legislation.<br \/>\nFor that, according to my opinion, PF Authority has not committed any<br \/>\nerror which requires interference by this Court while exercising the<br \/>\npowers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHence,<br \/>\nthere is no substance in present petition, accordingly, present<br \/>\npetition is dismissed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tHence<br \/>\nRule. The respondent will follow the  aforesaid decision in its true<br \/>\nspirit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>JHAVERI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>ar<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/5039\/2010 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5039 of 2010 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5099 of 2010 ========================================================= ARUN HARILAL KATBAMNA &amp; 5 &#8211; Petitioner(s) [&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-246989","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>Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - 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\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1821,\"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\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - 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\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010"},"wordCount":1821,"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\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010","name":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-19T18:39:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arun-vs-executive-on-23-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Arun vs Executive on 23 July, 2010"}]},{"@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\/246989","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=246989"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246989\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246989"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246989"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246989"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}