{"id":5106,"date":"2011-01-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-01-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011"},"modified":"2018-02-01T03:51:55","modified_gmt":"2018-01-31T22:21:55","slug":"chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","title":{"rendered":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable J.C.Upadhyaya,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCA\/16971\/2010\t 4\/ 4\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION-FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 16971 of 2010\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2604 of 2010\n \n\nIn\nSPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4117 of 2009\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nCHAITANYA\nGIRDHARALAL GANDHI - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nAHMEDABAD\nMUNICIPAL CORPORATION - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMRHEMALKACHARYA\nfor\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNone for Respondent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 31\/01\/2011 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)<\/p>\n<p>\tThe present application<br \/>\n\tis for condonation of delay of 531 days in preferring appeal against<br \/>\n\tthe order dated 23.06.2009 passed by the learned single Judge of<br \/>\n\tthis Court in Special Civil Application No.4117 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe have heard<br \/>\n\tMr.Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the applicant on the<br \/>\n\taspect of condonation of delay. In order to see that the merits of<br \/>\n\tthe appeal may not be frustrated, we have also heard Mr.Acharya on<br \/>\n\tmerits of the Letters Patent Appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAs such, the delay is<br \/>\n\tof 531 days, and such a long delay cannot be leniently viewed. If<br \/>\n\tthe contents of the application for condonation of delay are<br \/>\n\tconsidered, there is no sufficient explanation coming up to exercise<br \/>\n\tthe discretion for condonation of delay, and vague and general<br \/>\n\tstatements have been made in the application for condonation of<br \/>\n\tdelay and, therefore, as such, delay does not deserve to be<br \/>\n\tcondoned.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tApart from the above,<br \/>\n\tif the merits of the LPA is taken into consideration, the contention<br \/>\n\traised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the finding<br \/>\n\trecorded by the labour Court for concurring with the decision of the<br \/>\n\tdisciplinary authority based on the inquiry report is arbitrary, and<br \/>\n\tit was submitted that the labour Court in any case ought to have<br \/>\n\tinterfered with the proportionality of punishment u\/s.11A of the<br \/>\n\tIndustrial Disputes Act. It was submitted that the learned single<br \/>\n\tJudge has erroneously not considered the said aspect and, therefore,<br \/>\n\tthere is a good case on merits in the appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt deserves to be<br \/>\n\trecorded that the original petitioner &#8211; appellant herein<br \/>\n\tbefore the labour Court has not challenged the inquiry and has<br \/>\n\taccepted the inquiry. As per the inquiry officer&#8217;s report, the<br \/>\n\tcharges were proved. The labour Court, upon appreciation of the<br \/>\n\tevidence, has found that the findings recorded of charges having<br \/>\n\tbeen proved cannot be said as without proper material. The learned<br \/>\n\tsingle Judge has also concurred with the said aspect. The contention<br \/>\n\twhich was pressed in service before the learned single Judge was the<br \/>\n\taspect of proportionality of punishment u\/s.11A of the ID Act. It<br \/>\n\tdeserves to be recorded that once the charge is proved against the<br \/>\n\toriginal petitioner that he was found to have been caught red-handed<br \/>\n\tdoing business of hosiery, which was in the name of his wife, the<br \/>\n\tpunishment imposed of dismissal from service could not be said to be<br \/>\n\tshockingly disproportionate to the charges proved. Therefore, the<br \/>\n\tlabour Court rightly did not interfere with the punishment u\/s.11A<br \/>\n\tof the ID Act and so is by the learned single Judge when the award<br \/>\n\tof the labour Court was challenged in a petition under Article<br \/>\n\t226\/227 of the Constitution before this Court. We find that under<br \/>\n\tthe circumstances, on merits, it cannot be said that there is<br \/>\n\tsubstance in the appeal. Hence, if on merits, there is no case, no<br \/>\n\tuseful purpose would be served in considering the matter solely on<br \/>\n\tthe ground of condonation of delay and thereafter to consider the<br \/>\n\tmerits at the later stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHence, in view of the<br \/>\n\taforesaid, the application for condonation of delay is rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn view of the<br \/>\n\trejection of the application for condonation of delay, the LPA<br \/>\n\t(Stamp) No.2604 of 2010 would not survive and shall also stand<br \/>\n\tdisposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAt last Mr.Acharya<br \/>\n\tprayed that the direction may be given to the Corporation for<br \/>\n\tpayment of terminal benefits. We find that the said aspect is beyond<br \/>\n\tthe scope of the present appeal, since it was not before the learned<br \/>\n\tsingle Judge. However, if legally it is permissible, the petitioner<br \/>\n\tmay resort to appropriate proceedings for the said purpose.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(JAYANT PATEL,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(J.C.UPADHYAYA,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>(binoy)\t<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable J.C.Upadhyaya,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CA\/16971\/2010 4\/ 4 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION-FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 16971 of 2010 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2604 of 2010 In SPECIAL CIVIL [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5106","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - 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\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-31T22:21:55+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-31T22:21:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\"},\"wordCount\":644,\"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\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\",\"name\":\"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-31T22:21:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - 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\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-31T22:21:55+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011","datePublished":"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-31T22:21:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011"},"wordCount":644,"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\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011","name":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-01-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-31T22:21:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chaitanya-vs-ahmedabad-on-31-january-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chaitanya vs Ahmedabad on 31 January, 2011"}]},{"@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\/5106","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=5106"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5106\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5106"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5106"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5106"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}