{"id":37952,"date":"2010-04-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-20T01:31:27","modified_gmt":"2016-06-19T20:01:27","slug":"bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nLPA\/698\/2010\t 4\/ 5\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 698 of 2010\n \n\nIn\nSPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11478 of 2009\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 3785 of 2010\n \n\nIn\nLETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 698 of\n2010 \n \n=============================================\n \n\nBAL\nSHIKSHAN SAMITI TRUST & 1 - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n============================================= \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nMEHUL S SHAH for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2.MR SURESH M SHAH for\nAppellant(s) : 1 - 2. \nNone for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n3. \n=============================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tTHE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 20\/04\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)<\/p>\n
\tThe
\nappellants are original petitioners.  They had filed Special Civil
\nApplication No.11478 of 2009 which came to be dismissed by the
\nlearned Single Judge by his order dated 01.02.1010, which the
\nappellants have challenged in the present Letters Patent Appeal.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tIt
\nappears that the petitioners run a school which is situated in Final
\nPlots Nos. 267 and 268 of Town Planning Scheme No.2 of Vadodara.
\nBetween the said two Final Plots Nos. 267 and 268, there has been a
\nproposal to construct Town Planning Road of 7.5 meters width.  The
\nTown Planning Scheme has been duly sanctioned by the Government way
\nback in the year 1976 and came into effect from 15.03.1976.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tIn
\nthe writ petition, the main prayer of the petitioners was that the
\nsaid Scheme be varied to the extent of annulment of 7.5 meters road
\ndividing Final Plots Nos. 267 and 268 of the Town Planning Scheme
\nNo.2.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tIt
\nappears that the construction of the school building carried out by
\nthe petitioners was in excess of the approved plans.  Part of the
\nconstruction falls in the margin land of the said Town Planning Road.
\n Municipal authorities, therefore, issued a show cause notice dated
\n26.08.2009 to the petitioners u\/Sec.260(1) of the Bombay Provincial
\nMunicipal Corporations Act, 1949 (`BPMC Act’ for short) calling upon
\nthe petitioners to remove such unauthorised construction.  Petitioner
\nreplied to the said show cause notice vide a detailed representation
\ndated 03.09.2009.  Municipal authorities, however, passed an order
\ndated 23.09.2009 rejecting the objections of the petitioners.  This
\nrejection order also has been challenged by the petitioners in the
\nwrit petition.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tUpon
\nperusal of the reply to the show cause notice filed by the
\npetitioners it can be seen that the main thrust of the representation
\nof the petitioners was that the said Town Planning road of 7.5 meter
\nwidth is no longer useful or necessary.  The Town Planning Scheme,
\ntherefore, should be varied.  It is primarily on this ground that the
\nproposal for removal of the unauthorised construction was sought to
\nbe opposed.  Significantly, no contention has been raised by the
\npetitioners that the construction indicated in the show cause notice
\nis not in excess of the plan passed and if the Town Planning road
\nstands, the construction of the petitioners would be within the
\nmargin of the said road.  Thus, admittedly, the construction is in
\nexcess of the approved plans.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tBefore
\nthe learned Single Judge also the main thrust of the arguments of the
\npetitioners was that the Town Planning Road has become redundant and
\nthat the Town Planning Scheme should, therefore, be varied.  It was
\nalso pointed out that at one stage the Municipal authorities had also
\nconsidered the possibility of varying the Town Planning Scheme.  Be
\nthat as it may, the Town Planning Scheme was eventually not varied.
\nLearned Single Judge considered the submissions and found it not
\npossible to grant direction to vary the Town Planning Scheme.  The
\ncontention of the petitioners that the school accommodates large
\nnumber of students and sudden removal of the construction would cause
\nundue hardship to the students was sought to be obviated by the
\nlearned Single Judge, by offering a breathing time to the petitioners
\nto vacate the premises.  This offer was, however, not accepted.\n<\/p>\n
\tBefore
\nus the sole contention raised by counsel of the appellants was that
\nthe impugned order dated 23.09.2009 rejecting the objections of the
\npetitioners is a non-speaking order.  It was contended that when
\nSection 260(2) requires the authorities to consider the objections of
\nthe petitioners in response to the notice under Section 260(1) of the
\nBPMC Act, it is incumbent upon the competent authority to give
\nreasons for not accepting such objections.  Reliance was placed on
\nthe decision of the Apex Court in The Secretary & Curator,
\nVictoria Memorial Hall v. Howrah Ganatantrik Nagrik Samity and Ors.
\nreported in AIR 2010 SC 1285.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn
\nthe said petition, however, the Apex Court was considering a case
\nwhere the recommendations of Expert Committee appointed by High Court
\nin absence of any allegation of malafide or disqualification raised
\nagainst any Member of the Committee, were rejected without assigning
\nvalid and good reasons.  In that background, the Apex Court found the
\norder illegal.\n<\/p>\n
\tReliance
\nwas also placed on the decision of a learned Single Judge dated
\n11.08.2005 passed in Special Civil Application No.8863 of 1995
\nwherein with respect to the provisions of Sec.260 of the BPMC Act,
\nthe learned Single Judge observed:\n<\/p>\n
In
\nmy opinion, the petitioners cannot be deprived of their property
\nwithout the sanction of law and without payment of reasonable
\ncompensation.  If Rajkot Municipal Corporation requires the land of
\nthe petitioners for drawing fresh line for public street or for any
\nother public purpose, then it can do so by initiating the process of
\nacquisition which would necessarily involve giving of opportunity of
\nhearing to them and payment of compensation.  Under no circumstances,
\nthe petitioners can be deprived of their property without following
\nthe procedure established by law and without being given reasonable
\nopportunity to defend their property.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tNone
\nof the two decisions cited above would apply to the present case.  We
\nare not laying down any legal proposition of absolute application for
\nall cases.  However, in the facts of the present case, we find that
\nnot giving elaborate reasons by the authority while not accepting the
\nobjections of the petitioners would not be fatal to the order.  In
\nthe present case, virtually all factual aspects are admitted.  The
\nexistence of 7.5 meter Town Planning road between the two Final Plots
\nis not in dispute.  The fact that construction as it exists today of
\nthe school building of the petitioners falls within the margin area
\nof such road is also not in dispute.  The construction being in
\nexcess of the plan permitted is also not controverted by the
\npetitioners.  As noted earlier, on behalf of the appellants only
\nground urged was that the order of the authority rejecting the
\nobjections of the appellants was a non-speaking order.  No arguments
\nare made regarding prayer for variation of the Scheme.  Even
\notherwise, we find that such a request cannot be sustained.  Learned
\nSingle Judge has given elaborate reasons to refuse such prayer.  No
\nerror, irregularity or infirmity in the Scheme is established.  The
\nScheme was finalised way back in the year 1976.  In view of
\nundisputed facts noted above and in absence of any possibility if
\nvariation in the Scheme, construction of the petitioners cannot be
\nsaved.  Non-recording of detailed reasons therefore in the present
\ncase would not be fatal.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tCounsel
\nfor the appellants lastly submitted that Municipal authorities before
\ntaking possession of the land of the appellants for construction of
\nthe road must pay the compensation for the same.  Such question was
\nnever before the learned Single Judge.  This ground has not been
\nraised in the Appeal also.  There are no factual averments on record
\nto permit us to examine this grievance of the appellants.  This
\nground is therefore not possible to be considered in this Appeal.  In
\nany case, nothing stated in this order is meant to authorise the
\nmunicipal authorities to take possession of the land de hors the law.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn
\nthe result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.  Civil Application
\nalso stands dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
(S.J.\n<\/p>\n
MUKHOPADHAYA, C.J.)<\/p>\n
(AKIL
\nKURESHI, J.)<\/p>\n
[sn
\ndevu] pps<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010 Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA\/698\/2010 4\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 698 of 2010 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11478 of 2009 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3785 of 2010 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-37952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBal vs State on 20 April, 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\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-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=\"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-19T20:01:27+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-19T20:01:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1222,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-19T20:01:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bal vs State on 20 April, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 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\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-19T20:01:27+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-19T20:01:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010"},"wordCount":1222,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010","name":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-19T20:01:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bal-vs-state-on-20-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bal vs State on 20 April, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/37952","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=37952"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37952\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37952"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37952"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37952"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}