{"id":259759,"date":"1988-11-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1988-11-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988"},"modified":"2017-09-07T12:10:34","modified_gmt":"2017-09-07T06:40:34","slug":"hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","title":{"rendered":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1989 AIR  374, 1988 SCR  Supl. (3)1003<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: G Oza<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Oza, G.L. (J)<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           PETITIONER:\nHARI SHANKAR GAUR AND ANR. ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT30\/11\/1988\n\nBENCH:\nOZA, G.L. (J)\nBENCH:\nOZA, G.L. (J)\nSHETTY, K.J. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1989 AIR  374\t\t  1988 SCR  Supl. (3)1003\n 1989 SCC  (1) 240\t  JT 1988 (4)\t552\n 1988 SCALE  (2)1473\n\n\nACT:\n    Civil Services: Delhi Transport Corporation--I employees\nof   erstwhile\t Gwalior  and  Northern\t  Indian   Transport\nCorporation--Protected\temployees  under  the  Agreement  of\nTake-over--Right to continue in service upto 60 years.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    The\t Gwalior and Northern India Transport Company  (GNIT\nCompany)  was  operating transport services  in\t and  around\nDelhi.\tIt was taken over on May 14, 1948 by the  Government\nof India, Ministry of Transport and named as Delhi Transport\nService.  The services of all employees of the\t(IT  company\nwere  taken  over  by  the Government  of  India,  but\tthey\ncontinued  to be governed by the rules in force\t before\t the\ntake-over.  Subsequently  it  was taken over  by  the  Delhi\nMunicipal  Corporation and later on by the  Delhi  Transport\nUndertaking  and  came\tto  be\tknown  as  Delhi   Transport\nCorporation.\n    All\t employees of GNIT Company employed before  28.10.46\nand were in continuous service at the time it was taken over\nby  the\t Government  of\t India\twere  treated  as  protected\nemployees as per clause 7 of the take-over agreement.  Prior\nto  the\t take-over they were governed by the  Gwalior  State\nCivil Service Rules which stipulate the age of retirement at\n60.  Option  however  was there for  the  employee  to\tseek\nvoluntary  retirement at 55 years and for the Government  to\ncompulsorily  retire an employee at 55. The Delhi  Transport\nCorporation retired the petitioners on the ground that\tthey\nattained  the  age  of superannuation at 58  years.  It\t was\nchallenged  in a writ petition before the Delhi\t High  Court\nand the petitioners contended that option was there both for\nthe  Corporation as also the employees to retire at 55,\t but\nsuperannuation\tcould be only on reaching 60, and not at  58\nas claimed by the Corporation. The Delhi High Court rejected\nthe  petition.\tAgainst this, the petitioners have  come  to\nthis  Court  by\t way of a special leave\t  petition.  A\twrit\npetition has also been filed claiming the same relief.\n    Allowing  the  special leave petition as also  the\twrit\npetition, this Court,\n\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1003\n\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1004\n    HELD: The persons who were originally in the  employment\nof GNIT Company and were employed prior to October 28,\tl946\nand continued in service till May 14, l948 and onwards\twill\nhave the right to remain in service upto 60 years unless the\noption\tto  retire  was\t exercised  by\tthe  person  or\t the\nCorporation  at\t 55 years. The argument that the age  of  55\nyears at which an employee could be asked to retire has been\nraised by the Corporation to 58 years and if an employee has\nbeen  retired at 58, it was not prejudicial to him since  he\ncould have been retired in his erstwhile Company only at 55,\nhas  little merit in it. If the Delhi Transport\t Corporation\nhad  exercised\tits  right  to\tretire\tthe  petitioners  on\nattaining the age of 58 years, the argument would have\tbeen\ntenable.  But  that  was not done by  the  Corporation.\t The\nCorporation retired the petitioners on the ground that\tthey\nattained  the age of superannuation at 58 years. That  meant\nthe  Corporation  was under the wrong  impression  that\t the\npetitioners  had no right to continue beyond the age  of  58\nyears. [1008C-D; 1007E-G; 1008C]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">    CIVIL\/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil)<br \/>\nNo. 1244 of 1986.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      (Under <a href=\"\/doc\/981147\/\" id=\"a_1\">Article 32<\/a> of the Constitution of India).<br \/>\n\t\t\t    WITH<br \/>\n    S.L.P. (Civil) No. 8948 of 1986.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">    From  the  Judgment and Order dated 1().4. i986  of\t the<br \/>\nDelhi High Court in C.W.P. No. 795 of 1986.<br \/>\n    Jitender Sharma for the Petitioners.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">    T.U. Mehta and G.K. Bansal for the Respondents.<br \/>\n    The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n    OZA, J. This special leave petition is filed against the<br \/>\njudgment of the Delhi High Court rejecting a petition  filed<br \/>\nby  the petitioners. A separate writ petition for  the\tsame<br \/>\nrelief is also filed in this Court. The two matters raise  a<br \/>\nsimple question about the age of retirement of the employees<br \/>\nin  the\t Delhi Transport Corporation,  who  were  originally<br \/>\nemployed  in  the  erstwhile  Gwalior  and  Northern   India<br \/>\nTransport  Company  (&#8216;GNIT Company&#8217; for short)\tin  1946  or<br \/>\nbefore that.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1005<br \/>\n    It is not in dispute that before 1948 these\t petitioners<br \/>\nwere employed in the GNIT Company which was a company  owned<br \/>\nby  the Rulers of Gwalior in the erstwhile native  State  of<br \/>\nGwalior.  The  said  company  was  operating  the  transport<br \/>\nservices  in Delhi and areas around upto 13th May, 1948.  On<br \/>\n14th  May, 1948 the transport services in Delhi\t were  taken<br \/>\nover  by the Government of India, the Ministry of  Transport<br \/>\nand it was named as &#8220;Delhi Transport Service&#8221;. The  services<br \/>\nof  all\t the employees of the erstwhile\t GNIT  company\twere<br \/>\ntaken  over  by\t the  Government  of  India  but  they\twere<br \/>\ncontinued  to be governed by the rules which were  in  force<br \/>\nbefore\ttaking over. Subsequently it was taken over  by\t the<br \/>\nDelhi Municipal Corporation. Later on by the Delhi Transport<br \/>\nUndertaking  which  came  to be termed\tas  Delhi  Transport<br \/>\nCorporation&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">    Clause 7 of the agreement by which the GNIT services  in<br \/>\nDelhi  were taken over by the Government of  India  provided<br \/>\nthat  the services of the employees who were employed  prior<br \/>\nto  28th October, 1946 and were in continuous  service\ttill<br \/>\ni4th May, 1948 shall not be taken over on the terms not less<br \/>\nliberal\t than  those they were governed\t and  therefore\t the<br \/>\nemployees who were in employment prior to 28th October, 1946<br \/>\nwere treated as protected employees.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">    These  facts  are  not  in\tdispute.  According  to\t the<br \/>\npetitioners,  before  they  were  taken\t over,\tthe  service<br \/>\nconditions of the employees of GNIT Company were governed by<br \/>\nthe  Gwalior State Civil Service Rules. But  the  respondent<br \/>\ndenied\tthat and said that they were governed by the  Madhya<br \/>\nBharat\tCivil Service Rules. Admittedly, Madhya Bharat\tcame<br \/>\ninto existence in 1948 only. Before that there was no  State<br \/>\nof  Madhya Bharat. Repeatedly opportunity was given  to\t the<br \/>\nrespondent  counsel  to\t find  out as  to  what\t rules\twere<br \/>\napplicable  to\tthe  employees of the  GNIT  company  before<br \/>\nMadhya\tBharat\twas formed. Ultimately\tthey  pleaded  their<br \/>\ninability  to place any rule. So far as Gwalior State  Civil<br \/>\nService Rules are concerned, a copy of it in Hindi has\tbeen<br \/>\nfiled  by  the\tpetitioners  with  the\tEnglish\t translation<br \/>\nthereof.  It  is  not disputed that  these  were  the  rules<br \/>\ngoverning  the\tcivil servants in the Gwalior State.  It  is<br \/>\nalso not disputed that GNIT Company was originally a Company<br \/>\nincorporated in India where it was owned by the rules of the<br \/>\nerstwhile  Gwalior  State. According  to  petitioners  Civil<br \/>\nService\t Rules\tof  Gwalior were made  applicable  to  these<br \/>\npeople. In addition to what has been stated in the  petition<br \/>\nand which has not been controverted, they have also filed  a<br \/>\njudgment  of  the Industrial Court in Madhya  Pradesh  where<br \/>\nthis   question\t about\tthe  conditions\t of  service   about<br \/>\nretirement   came  into\t dispute  after\t the  formation\t  of<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1006<br \/>\nMadhya\tBharat\tand  the part of  GNIT\tCompany\t which\twas<br \/>\noperating  in  the  territories of the\terstwhile  State  of<br \/>\nMadhya\tBharat was taken over by the State of Madhya  Bharat<br \/>\nRoad  Transport Corporation. There too, a similar  agreement<br \/>\nwas reached and the question arose as to whether the persons<br \/>\nwho were in employment before the taking over, were governed<br \/>\nby  the\t Rules of the Gwalior State Civil servants.  It\t was<br \/>\nheld that those were the rules and in those rules the normal<br \/>\nage of retirement was 60 years.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">    In\tview of these circumstances it appears beyond  doubt<br \/>\nthat  these  people who were employed in  the  GNIT  Company<br \/>\nbefore taking over in Delhi by the Government of India\twere<br \/>\ngoverned  by  the  Gwalior State Civil\tService\t Rules.\t The<br \/>\nGwalior Civil Service Rules provided:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t\t\t&#8220;CHAPTER l-A<br \/>\n    7(a)(1)  Every employee has a right to  seek  retirement<br \/>\nfrom service after attaining the age of 55 years.<br \/>\n    (2)\t The Government also has authority not to allow\t any<br \/>\nemployee  to continue in employment after attaining the\t age<br \/>\nof 55 years and order his retirement.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">    (3)\t In case an employee does not seek  retirement\tfrom<br \/>\nservice\t after\tattaining  the\tage  of\t 55  years  of\t the<br \/>\ngovernment also does not order his retirement form  service,<br \/>\nthan he shall continue in service till he attains the age of<br \/>\n60 years.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">    (4)\t  Every\t employee  shall  compulsory  retire   after<br \/>\nattaining the age of 60 years provided his services are\t not<br \/>\nordered to be terminated earlier.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">    (5)\t An employee who retires under these rules shall  be<br \/>\nentitled  for  pension or Gratuity to which he\tis  entitled<br \/>\naccording to the rules.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">    Note  (1):\tThese  Rules will not apply  to\t the  Police<br \/>\nPersonnels.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">    Note  (2):\tThe  concerned\tDepartments  shall  initiate<br \/>\nretirement  proceeding\tagainst\t those\temployees  who\thave<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1007<br \/>\nattained  the age of 60 years at the time of enforcement  of<br \/>\nthe rules but immediate action shall be taken for release of<br \/>\nPension\t or  Gratuity  in  case of  those  who\thave  become<br \/>\nentitled  for  Gratuity\t or  Pension  and  till\t pension  or<br \/>\ngratuity  is  not sanctioned they shall not be\tretired.  In<br \/>\nfuture\tthis  procedure shall be followed  that\t action\t for<br \/>\npension\t or Gratuity shall be initiated one year in  advance<br \/>\nto which he is entitled at the age of 60 years in case of an<br \/>\nemployee  who  retire at the age of 60 years so\t that  there<br \/>\nshall be no delay in retiring him after attaining the age of<br \/>\n60 years.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">    The\t above\trules it indicates clearly an  employee\t who<br \/>\ndoes  not seek retirement from service after  attaining\t the<br \/>\nage  of\t 55 years or if the Government does  not  order\t his<br \/>\nretirement  at that age, shall continue in service  till  he<br \/>\nattains\t the  age  of 60 years. It is  also  indicated\twith<br \/>\nunmistakably  terms that every employee\t shall\tcompulsorily<br \/>\nretire\tafter  attaining the age of 60\tyears  provided\t his<br \/>\nservices are not ordered to be terminated earlier. In  other<br \/>\nwords the age of retirement was 60 years. Option however was<br \/>\nthere  for the employee to seek voluntary retirement  at  55<br \/>\nyears  and for the Government to compulsorily retire him  at\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">55.<br \/>\n    Counsel  for the respondent does not dispute  the  above<br \/>\nprovisions. He, however, argued that the age of 55 years  at<br \/>\nwhich an employee could be asked to retire has been  retired<br \/>\nby the corporation from 55 to 58 and if an employee has been<br \/>\nretired\t at 58 it was not prejudicial to him since he  could<br \/>\nhave  been retired at in his erstwhile. company only at\t 55.<br \/>\nOur  attention\twas  invited to Service\t Regulation  of\t the<br \/>\nCorporation  providing\tfor these matters. The\targument  is<br \/>\nattractive  but\t on a deeper consideration  we\tfind  little<br \/>\nmerit  in  it.\tIf  the\t Delhi\tTransport  Corporation\t had<br \/>\nexercised  its right to retire the petitioners on  attaining<br \/>\nthe  age of 58 years, the argument would have been  tenable.<br \/>\nBut  that was not done by the Corporation.  The\t Corporation<br \/>\nretired the petitioners on the ground that they attained the<br \/>\nage  of superannuation at 58 years. It is so stated  by\t the<br \/>\nnotice (Annex. E) dated January 2, 1986 issued by the Deputy<br \/>\nPersonnel Officer-I to Hari Shankar Gaur-petitioner in\tW.P.<br \/>\nNo. ]244\/86. The notice reads:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_1\"><p>\t\tDELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION<br \/>\n\t     A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING<br \/>\n\t\t  l.P. ESTATE: NEW DELHl<br \/>\nNo. PLD-IX(PF)\/85\/128\t\t\t\tDt. 2.1.1986<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t PG NO 1008<br \/>\n    Shri  Hari\tShankar\t Gaur s\/o  Shri\t M.L.  Gaur,  Office<br \/>\nSupdt.\twill attain the age of superannuation i.e. 58  years<br \/>\non  31.1.1986. He shall, therefore, retire from the  service<br \/>\nof this Corporation with effect from 31.1.1986 in accordance<br \/>\nwith clause l0 of the <a href=\"\/doc\/1683455\/\" id=\"a_1\">D.R.T. Act<\/a> (Conditions of\t AppointMent<br \/>\n&amp;  Service)  Regulations, 1952 read with  office  order\t No.<br \/>\nPLD\/2479  dated 7.3.1974. He may avail earned leave  due  to<br \/>\nhim prior to 31.1. 1986, if he so desires.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote id=\"blockquote_1\"><p>    We\tare  told  similar  notices  were  issued  to  other<br \/>\nemployees as well. l hat means the Corporation was under the<br \/>\nimpression  that the petitioners have no right\tto  continue<br \/>\nbeyond the age of 58 years.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p id=\"p_16\">    We\tare, therefore, of the opinion that the persons\t who<br \/>\noriginally were in the employment of GNIT and were  employed<br \/>\nprior to October 28, 1946 and who continued in service\ttill<br \/>\nMay  14, 1948 and onwards will have the right to  remain  in<br \/>\nservice\t up  to\t 60 years unless the option  to\t retire\t was<br \/>\nexercised by the person or by the Corporation at 55 years.<br \/>\n    In the result the writ petition and the SLP are  allowed<br \/>\nto the extent indicated above.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">G.N.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">\t\t\t\t\t  Petitions allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988 Equivalent citations: 1989 AIR 374, 1988 SCR Supl. (3)1003 Author: G Oza Bench: Oza, G.L. (J) PETITIONER: HARI SHANKAR GAUR AND ANR. ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT30\/11\/1988 BENCH: OZA, [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-259759","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - 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\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\" \/>\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=\"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-07T06:40:34+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988\",\"datePublished\":\"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-07T06:40:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\"},\"wordCount\":1512,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\",\"name\":\"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-07T06:40:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988\"}]},{\"@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":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - 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\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-07T06:40:34+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988","datePublished":"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-07T06:40:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988"},"wordCount":1512,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988","name":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And ... on 30 November, 1988 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1988-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-07T06:40:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-shankar-gaur-and-anr-etc-vs-delhi-transport-corporation-and-on-30-november-1988#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hari Shankar Gaur And Anr. Etc vs Delhi Transport Corporation And &#8230; on 30 November, 1988"}]},{"@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\/259759","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=259759"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259759\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259759"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259759"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259759"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}