{"id":255314,"date":"2009-05-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009"},"modified":"2017-05-30T02:17:38","modified_gmt":"2017-05-29T20:47:38","slug":"prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: B.S.Patil<\/div>\n
w? 40688\/2608\n_ 1 -\n{N THE H\u00a5GH comm' OF' KARNATAKA\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA H .\nDATED \"rms THE 25TH DAY OF' MAY, 20Q9\u00ab \"\nBEFORE _  \" '\nTHE HON'BLE MR..3UST>g'\u00e9$\u00a7.s,I\u00a5rA*1*-1'1, ,:_': V V_\nW.P.No.40688>l2;v00\u00e9'iIA.;*I'\u00a7'&   . 2 \" \nBETWEEN: V   ' V\n\nPrabhakar,\n\nS; 0 Devidas Dhongada,\n\nAgftd 38 years, Occ: Nil, _T  9 \n\nR\/Q (\"\ufb01fe Nanayan Basudkar,   V\n\nKomtigalli, Post:CZ}:1in;ii3(31i, 3' 9'  _  -  '\n\nDist. Gulbarga.       _   PETITIONER\n\nmy sri P-W!\u00bb H*3mnr;    \n\nAND:\n\n, The A  EX\u00a3:T1C1i\u00a3iV\u00a7':  Engi\ufb01cer,\n.' ' ..F.    v- . . . . . .. '\n\nV.   Sist. ._Gu;ba;\u00bbga.\n\n2. '\u00a5:'1:.\u20ac\"Chief' \nPWD, T' \ufb01n B (\u00a5iZ_m'th), Dhaxwad,\n\n _ D.C.CompOund, Qhazwad.\n\n\"  i'  ,S\u20ac<:rt\u00e9viaIy'' : ,\n\n_ '~.\u00a73I1bli\u00e9..W0rk3 Depa.,r\u00a3m&:1t,\n' , M5S:3!.'iil\u20aci:iIIg,\n' Bagfgtgalore.  RESPONDENTS\n\nH  V   Mj\ufb01umnr, AGA)\n\nThis Writ Petition is \ufb01led under Articles 226 8:. 1227 of the\n\n" Cons\ufb01tutiorz of In\u00e9ia prayiag to quash the order of the Labour Court,\n\nGulbarga dated 29.07.2008, which is at Anncxure-C, Ref.\n\n\n\nWP 40688\/2008\n.. Q ..\n\nN034\/$2005 and antler for reinstatement of petitio\ufb01er, with full\nbackwages and  0f aexvice and ali othar Consequentjai\nben\u00e9t\ufb01ts. \n\nThis WP. is com:i12g on for Pm\ufb01minaxy Hearing  this\nd\u00e9lf\ufb01 the Court made: the following:  ' --\u00ab  --~.. " ;. \n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
1. In this writ ge\ufb01iien, petiitioncr ii;  :_ c}t_1,ate{1.._. <\/p>\n
29.07.2008 passed by the Labo1;1*_{3ouzA’t, C3Vu1ba.zjg:\u00a7:,A’.;c\u00a5i:\u00a7mi\u00a3\u00a7\u00e9i11g i:}:.e
\nReference bearing N934] 2005 mafia\u00bb {he Smt\u00e9’ ‘%V\u00a3\u00a7II1I\u00a5lC\ufb01t mzcier
\nSection 19(1)(C) of the Indti\u00e9trial   (h\ufb01rt\u00e9iii\u00e9fter referred to<\/p>\n
as ‘the Act’, far short}<\/p>\n
2. It Wag this  ‘fi3\u00a2’}”:~:\u00a7{i$fiont:r that he was orally appointed as
\na Literate As’Si.s’iant’o?nVC$;?i11yuw;\u00a7L’g\u00e9 basis on 01.03.1933 under the pat<\/p>\n
raspondgs.-mt _-5  Exezcutive Engineer, RWLD. S*ub-Division,<\/p>\n
 mad that he continued his work till he was<\/p>\n
0153213? fmfn his service on 14.01.1989. He claimed that as<\/p>\n
 ‘*?z1& ha\u00a31~..5;_\u00a7er1\u00ab;3l\u00a3’il “‘A_;:>etition was mzmbextzd as ‘?65\/ 2000, Eventually the said<\/p>\n
 petition came to be mjected as barzt\u00e9 by limitation. Thereafter,<\/p>\n
 ii\ufb01sas claimant approached the appropriate (}Qvcr3:1,m\u00a3int seeking<\/p>\n
 z\ufb01fera\ufb01ce and the State Gcvcmment rezferreci the dispute under<\/p>\n
c4251-“‘\u00a7”<\\
\n'g 1<\/p>\n
xx'<\/p>\n
we qeesaxzoes<\/p>\n
W3-\n<\/p>\n
Seetien 10(1}((:} of the Act during the year 2005.  <\/p>\n
Assistant Executive Engineer appeare\u00e9 azmi c0n’feTste\u00a7iVV. <\/p>\n
cont;e11r}ing inter alia that the petiiioxggef’ wae ‘1\u00e9et: 3:;   AV<\/p>\n
empicwyee of the respondent 013  beSVie “at3.\u00abi VV
\nquestion of Sexmina\ufb01on of his   Ti evas \ufb01e
\nconmnded that the estab\ufb01s1}me1;t-~*ef _:\u00a31ie*-\u00bb_ree;e>e:1r.l–entViwas not an
\nindusuy as de\ufb01ned 1inde1″u”‘i:\ufb01.eA   was not a<\/p>\n
workman. Gmund offiielay    was also taken.\n<\/p>\n
3. Based o\ufb01’  Court raise\ufb01 issues as<\/p>\n
regards theeVi1\u00a7it11;eeVfef   of the 235′ respondent as an<\/p>\n
iifldlistlfy’.   Came to be raised as foiieowsc
\n“W};ethe;the   worked under the respondent<\/p>\n
as} 3 workm’;2z.::a? if so, whether the services were<\/p>\n
 ~ 4, _feiI1:.1\u00a7.f1ete\u20aciA~c.311 14.omi\u00a71989?”<\/p>\n
‘i’h0i3gh’..__Qthef”_~vi_ss2;ee were also raise\ufb01, Since they are not very<\/p>\n
 ylgerman\u00e9w fox-“__  \ufb01;e”‘ purpose of disposal of the writ petition, it is<\/p>\n
, .e .,”;\ufb01j;21ieeeVssa13%’–te refer to ‘Chem.<\/p>\n
A’    elaixnaxlbworkman examined himself. He di\u00e9 not produce<\/p>\n
‘V V  s\u00e9ga\u00e9sf\u00e9ioetzxnerzt to ShOW that he was employed as a workman under<\/p>\n
 the 13’ respondent nor did he choose to examine any eo—-empiGyee.<\/p>\n
WP 40688[20()8<\/p>\n
– 4 –\n<\/p>\n
On behalf of the mspondent, the Assistant Executive Engineer
\nconcerned was examined who deposed that the pctitiozlsrwas never<\/p>\n
employed as a Workman in thrtir e:stab1isI1.r:1eI1t.<\/p>\n
.3″ The Labour Court, by the impugned order  ” <\/p>\n
‘ -1<\/p>\n
estabiishment ef the mspondent–As3is;{aht*\u00ab\u00a7’,x\u20accutiv\u00e9-1:<\/p>\n
\n\nngiz:t:er'--V\u00abwa$. AV r\n\nnot an inclustryr it has also held    'no; to A\n\n<\/pre>\n
esta\ufb01\ufb01sh that the respondent ._cng2.1V’gfz’:ief:’erer1c\u20ac:V itglxe long and inortliaate dttlay of 19<\/p>\n
years in apprc\u00a75ichingVt11\u00e9A~f:r3uI;t. Acczordingly, the reference came: to<\/p>\n
 \u00a3gggrir:\u00a7r:d..hy this, the prrzs\ufb01nt writ getition is filers}.<\/p>\n
     appr:ari1},g for the \u00a73t3\u00a3i’ti0I1\u20ac:I’ Sr; Viias Kumar<\/p>\n
‘    the judgment of the Apex Court in Civii Appcsal<\/p>\n
 1\/ RG67 dispesed if on 28.09.2067 in the case of Karan Sizngh<\/p>\n
 Exer\ufb01iitive Engirleezr, Haxyana State Marketing Board, has stmngiy<\/p>\n
 ._.f2r\u00a3nt\u00a7\u00a7;:1ded that the Industriai Triiaunal or the Labour Court have no<\/p>\n
   g;\u00bb:;xs2e;’ to invaiidatc the reference on the ground of deiay. He has<\/p>\n
drawn my attention :0 the observations made by file Apex Court in<\/p>\n
$2: ..\n<\/p>\n
_=r,\/s,’ \/’
\nErr”\n<\/p>\n
\n
W? 40688] 2008<\/p>\n
., 5 –\n<\/p>\n
paragraph 9 of the said aids? to the effect, that 1116 ixz\u00e9ust\ufb01ai
\nTribtmai nsi1ic1’ai:$’f.\u00a2:’ <\/p>\n
c0nir:11t:icm in as much as only can the g1*621’nd of delaji; ‘.’;,*1e’1i:fenmn\u00e9{t <\/p>\n
cannot be dismissed hcislding that no   \ufb01fths”  A<\/p>\n
is guiity of delay and latchas in  I116 r\u00e9iitzf
\ncouid ha appropriately moulded, x'<t31'at_ ca1:'u'10t._Abg \u00a7a ground to
\ndismiss the reference statixig   exists which Ieqmxva' (1<\/p>\n
inciustrial adjudicatiozq.    recorded by the:<\/p>\n
Labour Co\ufb01rt  11o t'1'-i,s._;;utrc existed on the ciate of reference<\/p>\n
this to d\u20ac:}ay;Ca:nnof be <\/p>\n
  Cnzins\ufb01lv fog: the pe\ufb01tioner is also further justi\ufb01ed in<\/p>\n
IA'cQ\ufb01i:e5:r,;3#\u00a7.11g "1.?1at:1b.ve establishxncmt in question namely, the O\ufb01crz of<\/p>\n
th\u00e9  Engineer, Pubiic Works Department, Sub–<\/p>\n
V V' Divisio\ufb01;  Gulbarga Sistrict, is an industry far the purpose of<\/p>\n
H  Actt Rcf\u00e9mnce made to the decisien of the Apex Court by the<\/p>\n
 L:."\u00ab.1\u00a7)f}_V1L1I'~  in this regard siating that since it was 3 GOV{\u00a7I'IlII1\ufb01I}t<\/p>\n
 '::'u:3.dTei'taki11g discharging sov\ufb01rczign funczions, tha department cannot<\/p>\n
VA  "bk: {armed as .3 industry cannot be accepted, as the Labour Court has<\/p>\n
glossed ever the iaw on this point and has met referred to the other<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
41::\n<\/p>\n
Xx<\/p>\n
W? 40688 1′ 2008<\/p>\n
:5″\n<\/p>\n
minding precedents incluciing that of Rajappafs <\/p>\n
contantion of the iearzled Counsel for the p\u20actitiOl}\u20acf”i:i1\u20aci:tVA”<\/p>\n
Court erred in recortiing such a \ufb01ndi:1g:h\u00e9S’to\u00ab   L.<\/p>\n
\n\n8. However, what is not in favziuxjuof  \ncase. is the: \ufb01nding recorded by the    question of\nfact as. to whether the  hag.   g\ufb01spondent as\n3 workman and if   jvvtf\u00e9iere terminated on\n14.01.1939. 011    Court has held that\nthere was no    i'\u00e9COI'd a \ufb01nding that the\nciaimant     as 3 Workman It is not\n<\/pre>\n
in disizmte tiiat “{\u20ac,’\u00ab,”‘4((2V(*:_”{.)1:.jV\u20ac%1vV’..?.v.A:tE ~\u20ac\ufb01ii\u20aci\u00a7\u00a7\u00a5”\u00a5%T\u00a7\u20ac–~ of the workman, no other material<\/p>\n
is pxvduccd befdm \ufb02’}.E:vvC1:(}iiI_”\u00a3.V”~”.i36ti’lt3′.(}I1{i’}f’ has not chosen 4:0 examine<\/p>\n
  PetiAtVit):1–;:-r\u00ab has also not filed any apglication calling<\/p>\n
13j:n:31’1  xpajgiagsxzg\u00e9\ufb01t to produce the relevant extract, be it the wage<\/p>\n
  Vvymgist\ufb01r {if the  roll or any other dacument. The respondent<\/p>\n
 has spetgi\ufb01gz\u00e9siiynv\ufb01ontended that petitioner was not employed as a<\/p>\n
  addition, what is required to be kept in mind in this<\/p>\n
K  ctaSe’A’1;3’\u00bb\u00a5:1i\u00e91t tbs: petitioner had approached the Labour Cami: at the<\/p>\n
 ‘   urz\u00e9er Section 10(4A) aftczr a iapsc of 11 years from the<\/p>\n
 {\ufb01fe of the aliegcd tezmina\ufb01on and substaquemly by way of reference<\/p>\n
under Section 1()(I)(c) in the year 2005 a\ufb01tisr the claim petitian \ufb01led<\/p>\n
WP 40688 ,” 2008<\/p>\n
-7,<\/p>\n
was dismissed. Theugh, learned Counsel for the <\/p>\n
contends that in a matter like this, where an empiejseev <\/p>\n
an daily wage basis, it is rather hazs1V1′ te”e\u00a7r”ne.M_ ‘ct  <\/p>\n
evidence evidencing either the   ‘ the
\nemployee and hence the Labour Ceu.et”:\u00a5as
\nbmrien an the workman tov e;~”\u00a7tabii\u00a7ah*  iactuaigiy appointed
\nunder the management, in this   of this case, I
\ndo not \ufb01nd that $1;.ei1__a  to the aid of the
\npetitkmer. 1 it I i In V V it V <\/p>\n
9. In   employee raises a dispute
\nand produceeg  Show that he was an employee<\/p>\n
and was subeeqniently tezfttaitieted, the burden will shift to the<\/p>\n
:.\u20acii}})’1()jF\u20ac_i:”‘ 3z*..v1’1;<__:f[ cQnte:ii:Isvv–th3t there was :10 relationship ef employer<\/p>\n
 e11if)}0yee,V"\u00a30;"piftiduce necessary decuments and to Show that the<\/p>\n
  vwerk1i3ia_.\ufb01'VivaeS itietiiitieingaged by the management Counsel for the<\/p>\n
 petitionelt ie" jiueti\ufb01ed in placing xelianee for this preposition on<\/p>\n
 juiigiirients of thie Court and also of the Apex Court including<\/p>\n
me: iefi' the case in R.H.YEL1′.A’TT1′ vs ASSISTANT<\/a> wammvm<\/p>\n
 V  J  \u00ab- 2005:1031 pm 213. But what is gimmg in this case is<\/p>\n
 though as per the petitioner himself he was terminated from<\/p>\n
service on 14.01.1989, he has kept quiet for a peritxri of 1} years to<\/p>\n
WP 40688\/’2()()8<\/p>\n
-3-<\/span><\/p>\n
make a claim under Section ji0(4A} of the Aci which&V.3\u00a7\u00e9;\u00a7V’V<\/p>\n
not majntainabic. Having appmached the Court  a <\/p>\n
thereafter having mso\ufb01ed to the re11*ie\u20aciy” \u00ab1.11;tf,er_: <\/p>\n
seeking reference, it was incumbent upgiz}  .p\u20ac\ufb01Ivi'{:IA).IZk&?1′ ztci
\nacceptable material to prima facie V#:2*\u00bb:f\u00e9\u00a7f3.lb.ishA.{\u00a7iat’h\u00a7Vb$\u00a7?z:iie:;vV\u00e9iI1pioycd
\nthe Assimant Executive Enghqcer  wages. He
\ncould have atleast made a  ca\ufb02ing upon the
\nzespondent to  .__t_he ‘\ufb01vhich according to
\nhim wouid m\ufb02e-;rt”2!ii$_    done either. In these
\nci1’cumst.an\u00a7;es,TV     it was the duty of the<\/p>\n
mspondenfits :.:3taE$li:t~:h- -$’\u00a3i\u00a3i0ner was not its empioyec.<\/p>\n
10\u00a2 Thr; _facts  of this case do not Shaw that the<\/p>\n
;_vLahQurcomm:i\u00a5t6g\u00a7——–wy illggality in holding that in the absencn<\/p>\n
of   by the employee in support of his plea that<\/p>\n
  wa\ufb01s  worlman, no \ufb01nding could ha mcorded balding<\/p>\n
 “that thez;e :;clati0ns]:1ip of employer and employee and that he<\/p>\n
 t:\u00a7:fB1i;1a\u00a3ed illegally on 14.01.1989. At. any rate, this finding of<\/p>\n
 fa\u00e9tt AL-\u00a7a{ri\u00a71g been arrived at on the basis of the material on record.,<\/p>\n
 ‘   in exercise of Writ jurisdiction wii}. net upset the same<\/p>\n
 \ufb01\ufb01less it is found that there is any apparent error or illegality<\/p>\n
coxnmiiteci in rscoxding such a fmding.\n<\/p>\n
J9′<\/p>\n
W P 40688 \/ 2008<\/p>\n
11. in the light of the above, I do 130′: find any  the
\nconclusion arrived at by the Labour Court Hence,-[ft;h\u00a2..S;\u00a7i;ii:”;;i\u00a7i:ifio;:1<\/p>\n
faiis and the same is dismissed.   .’ H \u00bb’  <\/p>\n
  :mD<t:~;E <\/p>\n
KK<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 Author: B.S.Patil w? 40688\/2608 _ 1 – {N THE H\u00a5GH comm’ OF’ KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA H . DATED “rms THE 25TH DAY OF’ MAY, 20Q9\u00ab ” BEFORE _ ” ‘ THE HON’BLE MR..3UST>g’\u00e9$\u00a7.s,I\u00a5rA*1*-1’1, ,:_’: V V_ W.P.No.40688>l2;v00\u00e9’iIA.;*I’\u00a7’& […]<\/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-255314","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPrabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - 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\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-29T20:47:38+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\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prabhakar S\\\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-29T20:47:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1468,\"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\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Prabhakar S\\\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-29T20:47:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prabhakar S\\\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - 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\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-29T20:47:38+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\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-29T20:47:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009"},"wordCount":1468,"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\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009","name":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-29T20:47:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhakar-so-devidas-dhongadwe-vs-the-asstexecutive-engineer-ors-on-25-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prabhakar S\/O Devidas Dhongadwe, vs The Asstexecutive Engineer, Ors, on 25 May, 2009"}]},{"@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\/255314","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=255314"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255314\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255314"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255314"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255314"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}