{"id":252219,"date":"2010-12-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-12-26T10:22:54","modified_gmt":"2016-12-26T04:52:54","slug":"the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V.G.Sabhahit & S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
'VS\/Q L3i\u00e9~ S__L1}:)b_a   \"\"\" \" 'V\nAFIELE  7, I3iQCk.'A.'\n\n  Domiuxf,\n\n  ..(B_y St\"i'.fM..N.Pra$a1\"1I12-2., for\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT \n\nDATED TI-IIS THE 213-'? DAY or nEcEMEER \u00ab2ai'1L:\u00a7:A'\nPRESENT    AA A %&\nTI-IE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE   \nAND      . V. \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. \n\nWRIT APPF42-EL N(3;S8'vS(j'1i;V'\"'1.\u00a3)99 '(S)' \n\nBETWEEN:      \n\nThe Regional       \nIndian AirlH1eS\"LE1_nitSd'_,_   _  _   '\nCHENNAI -V  '   ..    APPELLANT.\n(By Smt.Sii\"ET}i\u00e91EAAVh;1n{'fi.i,  \nSri. K._Ka.stL1.\ufb01; ;r7\u00a7(iV';) 4' '\n\nAND:\nMr.B.Bg\u00a7baiH..\n\nS'c1__f '13.1fiiI_c_ii:f1g_\u00a7,\nB.1)'.A'; ,.._MIG\u00ab F_!.at:f;s, \n\n.-...--.........\u00ab\n\n;aANGAL.pHE*---571. .. RESPONDENT.\n\n\" _ '\"~_.Sri.I\".S.RzTjg()pa1,Adv.)\n\n*_=i=\ufb01=I<j!<_*_*W=f<_*\n\nMb\n\n\n\n{J\n\nThis Appeal is {\ufb02ed 1n1.ci<\u00e9r Sc-,\u00e9cti0r1 4 of the Karriataka\nI\ufb01gh (hurt. Act, praying to set, aside t'h<: order dated\n21.09. E998 passed in Writ Pstiliimi N0.18730\/ \u00a3994.\n\nThis Appezaj having l)(.'.(_'.f1 heard and res\u00a7:;i*v:\u20ac%'(3. for\nJudgmsrit, this day, SATYANARAYANA J., 1')r0n0i1,1\ufb01~:?_\u00a73ci"'the\nfollowirlgi   'A \u00bb. \n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
The resporident. — Indian] AjA_rIi.1.’1\u00e9s ‘:4_LiIf1iI;e(‘]V,\u00ab<\/p>\n
W.P.N0. 18730 \/ 1994 is i1’I_1pug:1i..1’1g_ t1.1sOr_cicr   ,<\/p>\n
Passed in the said Writ I'<-risii.i0'ri1.  V'<\/p>\n
2. The facts Ieading 1f’c:5t;.’m’st_ f:\u00a7:11_.r2{fCo’t1\u00bb:’t appeal are as<\/p>\n
under:\n<\/p>\n
Resporiplent  “axg_I’1i!\u00e9 he was working as Traf\ufb01c<\/p>\n
Of\ufb01cer of the \u00e9ipgx-zllsrit.i”-alisgeci to have involved in serious<\/p>\n
I-‘,;ni’sCorid1ic5ti’i ‘Ai.r_i_”i’i’saif<i cnq1_1_i_Ify, appsiiarit also i.'n_si'.it':,1te(1 an enquiry<\/p>\n
7.\u00a71pp’oj.nti.r1g*..-(3’r1(: R.Push.pavane-uri as e:nquiry cifficezr, which<\/p>\n
  on 24.04.1993 and c:()nClu(i<:d on 29.11.1993,<\/p>\n
T \u00e9_14\ufb01er"ieXa1niI1ir1g 17 uri.t:r1ess\u20acs and rnarking ()fII1()I'C than 100<\/p>\n
documents on behalf of management, appellant herein.<\/p>\n
Thereafter, enquiry officer subrnitted a \ufb01nding gixdng<\/p>\n
for arriving at conclusion holding the respondent 'oi'. <\/p>\n
the charges alleged.\n<\/p>\n
3. Pursuant to the said finding of  report’; lsllowp<\/p>\n
cause notice was issued on tllleierespoildentl’
\nproposing punishment   pserxvrioeivvwhich was
\nchallenged by the  1994 which
\nwas initially  dated 14.09.1994
\nSingle Judge:    the appellant to
\ncomplete  and pass final orders.\n<\/p>\n
However, tl1e”‘–appellat_nf pennitted to give effect to the<\/p>\n
said order, until  orders to be passed in the said Writ<\/p>\n
AF’ve_titiVon_._ S\u00bb:uhsr::qu_ently, er1q’uiry was completed and the order<\/p>\n
 was ‘passed’fojr..ren1ova] of respondent from service by order<\/p>\n
 dated  On such order being passed, respondent<\/p>\n
alltherein}—petitioner before Single Judge, made necessary<\/p>\n
 __a:a’1er’rdtnent to the Writ Petition filed by him. Thereafter the<\/p>\n
‘wsmjs<\/p>\n
Single Judge by an orcier claieci 21.()9.i998 allowed tlfict said<\/p>\n
Writ Petition. filed by the i’\u20acS[)()I1(‘l()’fll. * employee ht)jlltli.tig:”‘i.11at<\/p>\n
the enquiry conclucteci by that appellant is defe(:-alive’and 4_<\/p>\n
the order of his removal i’rom servi(:(\u00e9”‘wa,s  r\u00e9s.\u00e9.rvx”1t1gl f<\/p>\n
liberty to the a.ppc;:1lant l1er<::in_ to iiollflygiie-ililtivzi l<\u00e9;.1lqu.iry <\/p>\n
the resporiclent W dc-:linq'ue1i1.i':V  1;-mi
\ncertain reliefs to the rI1t of full
\nsalary from the date of   he will be re-\n<\/p>\n
insiituted with  and also for
\npayment of  days from the date of
\nreceipt of   is continued under
\nSE1SI)\u20acI’lSi()Il ‘iir’1_i,il  is coinpleted, he shall be<\/p>\n
paid sL1ly2sist;<311(:\u00a5:\u00bb._all0Wan(.:eT i:1'1(:lu(iiI1g increments in addition<\/p>\n
\ufb01'['h{;'V  1)z1y\u00e9i5lc': to him as above.\n<\/p>\n
4.1   iiiiciiiig of tile Single Judge is under challenge<\/p>\n
Vl’i:_1 i;his”‘~..a;)pe’a;l;’dn the ground that the View of the Single<\/p>\n
l iliaiiilie e-nquiry is (lef<=:(:ti.Ve for non issue of copies of<\/p>\n
(_'ic')_Ci::.IVIi'(.:;'1'is peri.ail1'1i1'1g to (.3131 and Vigilairlcc ('}I.'fic\u20acr is not valid<\/p>\n
and eont1fa.ry to iaw laid down by the Apex Court. and the
\nI'3\u00a3lSOI1S given. by Sirigie Judge that opporturiity to__ cross<\/p>\n
examination was not granted is contrary to the i'C()(')Tx(31S:'\u00a7"fijhat<\/p>\n
the fimiing of the Sirigle Jucige so far as   <\/p>\n
()bS(','I'VII1g that non pr()dneti().r'1. of vci'()''c:uI11e.:_f.j1t.s_..1\u00a7ev15t:a.i1'1–ii1gxWto ' f<\/p>\n
'mvestig,'at.i()n_ has vit'iate<'i the e1'1(1t1ier3'%'\u00abis";r_1(A3t: e(ir'::eet.,. wh,e'1~1Vvthe<\/p>\n
said documents were not reii(::i::.""up()ri' 'fQ1*=,tIf"1_e ef
\narriving at the \ufb01ndings iVE*1~.t1i1C ei1i'qt,1nti:jf.""eAFurttier, though the
\npreliminary enquiry report itstibtriiitted..:\\b3?_'.:N.'P.Raghavan was
\nnot relied. upoi";   etttempt on the part of<\/p>\n
the Singlettitictigefeto   production of doctumesnt<\/p>\n
sought :f()rV'*a1i1Qu:1tswte.fc:;\u00e91ppi.fe(:i21t'ion of evidence, which is<\/p>\n
not perrn.fiss'i.1)x1te ..1m<ieif._Arttiele 229 of the Co'nstit.ut.ior1 of India.<\/p>\n
,*'Wher1V-ithctife is sut"ti(:ie-'zit evidence to prove the charges,<\/p>\n
ie-:;jarr1.e('i ..Str1.gie'JIi'c1ge s1.1_0u1(i not have eoI1si.dered the same as<\/p>\n
_ease"0f"i'1oAeifidence and should have interfered with the<\/p>\n
 v\ufb01';'I(iiIlg'uuOf  "ehqu_iry. .Further the firiding to the effect that<\/p>\n
"tiiie wit;neSses are spcamrag e1't)out the contents of the
\nd()(;1,:;Ir1erj.–ts mzirkeci t'I'1:1fough them is also L3I1t('.I1E1b1(', and<\/p>\n
R\u00bb. \/1\u00bb:\n<\/p>\n
\n
()<\/p>\n
contrary to the deeisiorl in K1.1ld:i_p Si.I’1g1″1 Vs. State of Punjab
\nreported in 1997(1) LLN Page-3 \u00a332 and in the light of the said
\ndecision, strirtt proof of evidence  not 2.-zpplieable to the<\/p>\n
domestic enquiry and also challenged the same on tl:1evgfound<\/p>\n
that the principle laid down by the Apex <\/p>\n
Pooran Mal case and State Bank of Bikam.’1i,r’ ‘aI1{i*..Jai_;)’ttr  V<\/p>\n
Srinath Gupta reported 111 1997 [1] IQLN lSTat;.;a’of<\/p>\n
Mysore Vs. Shivabasappa ll  reported in
\n1963 SC 375. ‘Ifl1<'i:"lr.ll'ti()  judgements are
\nnot properly   of the learned Single
\nJudge is   the appreciation of<\/p>\n
overall evidence availatjlle onalreciorti.\n<\/p>\n
5. It is  ea-se1.olt”\u00abf_:l1e appellant that in the instant<\/p>\n
teaspe, at\/l”ie1jeV’ i.1jreg11l’a:’rit-ies have taken place in respect of<\/p>\n
sliipmentyp  baskets, excess quantities received are<\/p>\n
‘ ‘=.___,deiivered im:l1ediiat.e1y as they are pe”risha.bIe in nature.<\/p>\n
-4 lf’_j-,.’1fl3’e,rei_or<: " iaz'1sp'ite oi" eor1<:rete evidence avai_1ab.1e regarding<\/p>\n
 ex.eess_liasket:s of goods which are un–n1an.i.fested or properly<\/p>\n
\u20ac')Vid(",l"1(3C(.1 through. the witness S1'dd.:-1ia.h, the same  not
\nproperly appreciated and the learned Single Ju(ig-V1.9’Avg-%.E’!)(\u00a7X (‘Jourt which are subsequemily modi\ufb01ed<\/p>\n
V l and deviated  the earlier judgments by later judgments of<\/p>\n
K AA.pexV”Court and the reliance placed on some of the<\/p>\n
 are not directly applicable to the facts of the ease<\/p>\n
 the same will have no force in the case on hand.\n<\/p>\n
l\/’15’\/aK_,,?\n<\/p>\n
\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
or sta.teI1’1cI1t: relied Lapori in the ci’1q’1.1i3y should be prc\ufb02ticed.
\nIn the iristam case, wh.e1’1 t1’1e sarrie is C{}Ii’11’)li(3d with, the<\/p>\n
enquiry should not be held. to be vitiated. It is ais.e~\u00abt.he of<\/p>\n
the appellant that when documents are  <\/p>\n
witriesses by furnishiiig copies to the re.s1A)(:ri_c1e’i1’t’ho1.diij1g,the<\/p>\n
same  inadmissibie in (:’.V1′(1\u20acfjI’l{‘2E?\u00a2__iS o’Vppv()Se(i ti:J”ti1e’_rati;:) <\/p>\n
down by the Apex Court in the Irizittcr of reporteci in
\nAIR 1963 SC 375 and it ~–;i{l:,<',-(_)  i'ewappreciatior1 of
\nevidence, which is not permi_s:sib–1e 226 of the
\nConstitution of\n<\/p>\n
7.  ti1er.e   evidence ava\ufb02able on<\/p>\n
record to cmfneto’ .tI1preciat._iori of the contentions<\/p>\n
it Cadvancegl  tVheACa1)1)c21.iar’1t to the ef:fect that the deiinquerit<\/p>\n
–. i.”,ernj)!oyee “an undesirable clement”, whose ceriiinuaiice in<\/p>\n
*mf\\\u00ab?’\u00a7<\/p>\n
e’:I1ploymc111: would jeopardise the irlterest of the Company
\napart from the lives of passe1’1_ge.rs. ‘I’heref0re, the relief of re-<\/p>\n
ir1staiene1ent. and only reas()nai:.)1c comperisation as iridicated<\/p>\n
by the Apex Court in caieria of cases should be g1ja1’1\u00abi.ed._j’is} riot<\/p>\n
properly appreciated and considered by   <\/p>\n
Judge. It is also contended that tl1e:=.I:earr1e@?l Stogle-dt1’;1g.ew\u00bb:.11as<\/p>\n
not appreciated where public iriterestllis i11Vo1<Je'(l.,;vserviees <\/p>\n
employees can be terrninated wit_h:oL1:t .'r1o1(1ir1g– . In the
\nlight of that, in the iI1starl'i'e'arse~,Lthou\u00e9gh"elaborated enquiry is<\/p>\n
conducted into ther'm_ai.t.er';"alter giiysirig"s1.it\ufb01'(:ient opport unity<\/p>\n
to the czrijiployce\ufb01o  _lc:f'warcl_VVliiVs defence and thereafter
\norder passed for l1is.""re"tr1sg)'v-allyirom service should not have<\/p>\n
been set  ~Qr1v.t,ecl'_1r1ieal ::_gr()urkd. The learned Single Judge
\n alsg failed to"\u00bbapVp'reciate that on the relevant date though<\/p>\n
 respori'Eien'tA.employee was not on duty, he was present in<\/p>\n
tlie__ place o'l'..ocz\u00e9iur\u00e9feritte which is con\ufb01rmed by M.W.5 and the<\/p>\n
it "'v'reasoi1._s  the learned Sirigle Judge in that behalf is<\/p>\n
" iyj'irieorrecrt,"Vi_\u00e9\\y. It is also tlleir case that even before the order
\n ._oi'.fre1h"oVal dated ()4.()5.1995  given effect to, respoI1de:nt<\/p>\n
m,"V}<\/p>\n
could not have el1a}le'nge(i tl'1.e same, Where the regulations
\nprovide for an appeal before Challenging the same ':')et.'e.f'e this<\/p>\n
Jourt in a writ jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n
8. Learned Counsel appearing ..~for_ A ap[)eVl<Iant  to'<\/p>\n
substantiate the af()r<.:sai(:l g.r()1.11':(.ls on W:l1icl'1 the ap<\/p>\n
\ufb01led Challenging the order  leVa';__r1{:r.–ll  -judge'<\/p>\n
supported by eatena of jl,1.:(ZlgII1(31?.l'S  Co\ufb01r1~.,an'd also the
\nApex Court. The aiforesatdll   the appellant
\nwere negated by:.tl'=lA\u20ac::V the delinquent –\n<\/p>\n
1″espo}:1dent   s\ufb01bstantiate the judgment<\/p>\n
of the 1earn,_ed–. E3ing1’le”J.,titlgelV .is”proper and reasonable.<\/p>\n
9. After li’:’1,1r1s<3l for the appellant and<\/p>\n
vresI)onfi'<5::1t'and 'g;()j;j1_g.t11r()I1g11 the \ufb01ndings of the learned<\/p>\n
lS1.\u00a7;g1e"\u00bbt_I11clgee  lmpugned order, it is seen that the<\/p>\n
  has gone through the aforesaid<\/p>\n
 contentions'  light. of the judgments cited by the counsel<\/p>\n
 ap[)'<%a1*i1;g for t.'E1.e appellant – management and the<\/p>\n
L\/';\/'\\-?\n<\/p>\n
\n
re,s.-:.po1:e1d<_:.r1t ~– employee in the writ petition 3.r1(i on<\/p>\n
app.re<:i.z1t,ior1 of the same, 1121:; l'r21,m(:<'l the fol.1ow'mg iSS1..'l(;'.S2<\/p>\n
1. Whether the enquiry conducted against
\nthe petitioner was legal, valid, fair
\nwas in accordance with t.he rele=;\u00a7fQ%,’t”r1t\u00bb.’_’<\/p>\n
Regulations?\n<\/p>\n
2. Whether the rtinciings 19\u00ab<:<:01*'<ile:d    'l<\/p>\n
Enquiry Officer are  andhvlalid? .\n<\/p>\n
3. Whetlrler the p__e11alty  ‘removal’. p*ropose’ 5:, <\/p>\n
4. o tvl1at.V1;elie_fl ‘\u00bbpetitione1′ is entitled to’?<\/p>\n
grad l1as_\u00a7Iigl1tly aizsjilvert-1(l each one of them with reference to<\/p>\n
the availachlir. nfi:;i.t(zri21.l on. record and has come to the right<\/p>\n
C<)r1lcl,:1ti.~:\u00bbiorvi'Vi.li'_"–\u00a7)a}ftla1iy allowing the writ petition \ufb01led by the<\/p>\n
respor1det1t*.;~ hempiloyee l'1erei11 and the learned Single Judge<\/p>\n
 "lies figlttly decline<:l to {1OIlSl(l\u20acI' the peti_t:ioner's prayer to<\/p>\n
  "Ruhr 30 of the St;a;m_l_ing ()rn:ier Regulations is Void.<\/p>\n
:w\u00abV,-1L?\n<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
10. Though the learned Single Judge has quashed the
\nimpugnetl order so far as removal of’respon(ler1t from Vserviee,<\/p>\n
holding that the said removal from service is not p1’eee(41’e_d.~by<\/p>\n
valid and proper enquiry. The eharge sheet based. ‘(}{lv”‘.tfii”t\u00a7’h.V’.<\/p>\n
the enquiry was conducted is not””Vqt1a.s}j1ped;.\u00ab Liberty “is<\/p>\n
reserved to the appella.r1t l1e1’e:i,’n to 4’i1ol’d a der1Aova’~ eiildqtiiiyp<\/p>\n
against the petitioner on the sa1r1’e,ei1arges’*i’_n’aeeordariee with<\/p>\n
law by compliance with  .of1a.aturaIV justice, if the
\nappellant so desires.  ‘ll-‘.fCi)_’rff:ter1tion of the<\/p>\n
appellant that tl4’e”i’pip1_1gx1ecl  in law cannot be<\/p>\n
accepted    opportunity being
\nreserved  uthe t._:lA”i~1e:~rt:i.:r1 to hold denova enquiry<\/p>\n
against the respo1_jid’en’t 9’-e:1:r’iploye.e herein. It is also seen that<\/p>\n
the_:iattire”lof the charges levelled against the<\/p>\n
respo.n<ieiaif'ar1d'(i  the evidence available on record and the<\/p>\n
' Vvlfaczt    being ')\u20acIE"1dlI1 for ion time, the learned
\n_ ._ Cl FY .e I Q g<\/p>\n
H   has rightly awarded payment. of full back salary.<\/p>\n
4'\u00a7't._is._Vf1';:'rt'l1er observed by the learned Single Judge that if the<\/p>\n
re.-:sp'oI'a('ie.r1t, herein  c:or1i:ih.ue to be under suspension till the<\/p>\n
41<\/span><\/p>\n
in;\n<\/p>\n
\n
Com Ietion of czlenova er1(z.z:i’ , 1)urs’:1ar’1t {’10 the 0.13211′ fees which
\n1 77 <\/p>\n
are already framed 21gaJ’ns'{: him.\n<\/p>\n
AGV.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 Author: V.G.Sabhahit & S.N.Satyanarayana ‘VS\/Q L3i\u00e9~ S__L1}:)b_a “”” ” ‘V AFIELE 7, I3iQCk.’A.’ Domiuxf, ..(B_y St”i’.fM..N.Pra$a1″1I12-2., for IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DATED TI-IIS THE 213-‘? DAY or nEcEMEER \u00ab2ai’1L:\u00a7:A’ PRESENT AA A %& TI-IE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE AND . V. […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-252219","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - 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\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-26T04:52:54+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\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-26T04:52:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2116,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\",\"name\":\"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-26T04:52:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 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":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - 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\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-26T04:52:54+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\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-26T04:52:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010"},"wordCount":2116,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010","name":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-26T04:52:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-regional-director-vs-babai-b-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Regional Director vs Babai B on 21 December, 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\/252219","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=252219"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252219\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=252219"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=252219"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=252219"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}