{"id":62766,"date":"2010-03-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010"},"modified":"2018-11-14T15:34:48","modified_gmt":"2018-11-14T10:04:48","slug":"bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010<\/div>\n
       IN\u00a0THE\u00a0HIGH\u00a0COURT\u00a0OF\u00a0JHARKHAND\u00a0AT\u00a0RANCHI\n                                 W.P.\u00a0(L)\u00a0No.\u00a03246\u00a0of\u00a02001\n      Bhubaneshwar\u00a0Mallick.....................                                            Petitioner\n                                         Versus\n      1. Employer\u00a0in\u00a0relation\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0Management\u00a0of\u00a0Central\u00a0Coal\u00a0Fields\u00a0Limited,\u00a0\n         Ranchi\n      2. The\u00a0Presiding\u00a0Officer,\u00a0Central\u00a0Government\u00a0Industrial\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0(No.\u00a02),\u00a0\n         Dhanbad.....................                                           Respondents\n                                    ......\n<\/pre>\n
      Coram:\u00a0The\u00a0Hon’ble\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Justice\u00a0Amareshwar\u00a0Sahay
\n                             ……\n<\/p>\n
      For\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner         :\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Rajiv\u00a0Ranjan,\u00a0Advocate
\n      For\u00a0the\u00a0Respondents        :\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Ananda\u00a0Sen,\u00a0Advocate.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n
                             ……<\/p>\n
\n                                             O\u00a0R\u00a0D\u00a0E\u00a0R\n      C.A.V.\u00a0on\u00a006\/11\/2009\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0            \u00a0Delivered\u00a0on\u00a017\/03\/2010\n\n\n20\/\u00a017.03.2010      Heard\u00a0the\u00a0parties.\n\n<\/pre>\n
      2.            The \u00a0 petitioner, \u00a0 i.e. \u00a0 the \u00a0 concerned \u00a0 workman \u00a0 has \u00a0 filed \u00a0 this \u00a0 writ\u00a0<\/p>\n
      petition \u00a0 challenging \u00a0 that \u00a0 portion \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 award \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 Central \u00a0 Government\u00a0<\/p>\n
      Industrial\u00a0Tribunal,\u00a0Dhanbad,\u00a0dated\u00a015th\u00a0 May\u00a02001,\u00a0whereby,\u00a0the\u00a0Industrial\u00a0<\/p>\n
      Tribunal \u00a0 after \u00a0 holding \u00a0 the \u00a0 dismissal \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 concerned \u00a0 workman \u00a0 to \u00a0 be \u00a0 not\u00a0<\/p>\n
      justified\u00a0and\u00a0directed\u00a0for\u00a0his\u00a0reinstatement\u00a0but\u00a0did\u00a0not\u00a0allow\u00a0the\u00a0privilege\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
      back \u00a0 wages. \u00a0In\u00a0 other \u00a0words \u00a0the\u00a0 refusal\u00a0of \u00a0the\u00a0 Industrial\u00a0 Tribunal\u00a0to\u00a0award\u00a0<\/p>\n
      back\u00a0wages\u00a0in\u00a0under\u00a0challenge\u00a0in\u00a0this\u00a0writ\u00a0application.\u00a0<\/p>\n
      3.            In\u00a0view\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0limited\u00a0question\u00a0involved\u00a0in\u00a0this\u00a0writ\u00a0application,\u00a0it\u00a0<\/p>\n
      is\u00a0not\u00a0necessary\u00a0to\u00a0state\u00a0in\u00a0detail\u00a0the\u00a0facts\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0case.\u00a0Suffice\u00a0is\u00a0to\u00a0say\u00a0that\u00a0<\/p>\n
      the \u00a0 petitioner, \u00a0 who \u00a0 was \u00a0 dismissed \u00a0 from \u00a0 the \u00a0 employment \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 Central\u00a0<\/p>\n
      Coalfields\u00a0Limited\u00a0after\u00a0domestic\u00a0enquiry,\u00a0has\u00a0been\u00a0ordered\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0reinstated\u00a0in\u00a0<\/p>\n
      service\u00a0 \u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0Industrial\u00a0Tribunal,\u00a0holding\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0was\u00a0not\u00a0found\u00a0<\/p>\n
      guilty\u00a0of\u00a0misconduct\u00a0and,\u00a0consequently,\u00a0his\u00a0order\u00a0of\u00a0termination\u00a0was\u00a0set\u00a0aside.<\/p>\n
      4.            The \u00a0 learned \u00a0counsel \u00a0 appearing \u00a0 for \u00a0 the \u00a0 petitioner \u00a0 submitted \u00a0 that\u00a0<\/p>\n
      the\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0has\u00a0not\u00a0assigned\u00a0any\u00a0reason\u00a0for\u00a0refusal\u00a0to\u00a0award\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0to\u00a0<\/p>\n
      the\u00a0petitioner.\u00a0According\u00a0to\u00a0him,\u00a0if\u00a0the\u00a0termination\u00a0of\u00a0a\u00a0workman\u00a0is\u00a0held\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0
\n illegal\u00a0and\u00a0consequently\u00a0such\u00a0termination\u00a0from\u00a0service\u00a0is\u00a0set\u00a0aside\u00a0then\u00a0in\u00a0that\u00a0<\/p>\n
case\u00a0the\u00a0award\u00a0of\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0is\u00a0consequential\u00a0and\u00a0it\u00a0has\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0made\u00a0therefore,\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0Industrial\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0ought\u00a0to\u00a0have\u00a0awarded\u00a0consequential\u00a0relief\u00a0of\u00a0full\u00a0back\u00a0<\/p>\n
wages\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner.\u00a0In\u00a0support\u00a0of\u00a0such\u00a0submissions,\u00a0the\u00a0learned\u00a0counsel\u00a0<\/p>\n
for\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0relied\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0decisions\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Supreme\u00a0Court\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0cases\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
“Manorma \u00a0 Verma \u00a0 (Smt)\u00adversus\u00ad \u00a0 State \u00a0 of \u00a0 Bihar \u00a0 & \u00a0 Others, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0<\/p>\n
(1994)\u00a0Supp\u00a0(3),\u00a0SCC,\u00a0671”,\u00a0“Union\u00a0of\u00a0India\u00a0&\u00a0Others\u00adversus\u00ad\u00a0Ramchander \u00a0<\/p>\n
&\u00a0Another,\u00a0reported\u00a0in\u00a0\u00a0(2005)\u00a09\u00a0SCC\u00a0365”,\u00a0“General\u00a0Manager,\u00a0Haryana \u00a0<\/p>\n
Roadways\u00adversus\u00ad \u00a0 Rudhan \u00a0 Singh, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0 \u00a0 (2005)5 \u00a0 SCC \u00a0 591,\u00a0<\/p>\n
“Allahabad\u00a0Jal\u00a0Sansthan\u00adverus\u00ad\u00a0Daya\u00a0shankar\u00a0Rai\u00a0&\u00a0Another,\u00a0reported \u00a0<\/p>\n
in \u00a0 (2005) \u00a0 5 \u00a0 SCC \u00a0 124”, \u00a0 “U.P.SRTC \u00a0 Ltd.\u00adversus\u00ad \u00a0 Sarada \u00a0 Prasad \u00a0 Misra \u00a0 & \u00a0<\/p>\n
Another, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0 (2006) \u00a0 4 \u00a0 SCC \u00a0 733” \u00a0 and \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 case \u00a0 of \u00a0 “Mahendra \u00a0<\/p>\n
Harizan\u00adversus\u00adState \u00a0 of \u00a0 Jharkhand \u00a0 & \u00a0 Others, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0 \u00a0 2006 \u00a0 (2) \u00a0<\/p>\n
JLJR,\u00a0591”.\n<\/p>\n
5.             On\u00a0the\u00a0other\u00a0hand,\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Ananda\u00a0Sen,\u00a0learned\u00a0counsel\u00a0appearing\u00a0for\u00a0<\/p>\n
the \u00a0 respondents \u00a0 CCL \u00a0 submitted \u00a0 that \u00a0 the \u00a0 condition \u00a0 prevalent \u00a0 for \u00a0 awarding\u00a0<\/p>\n
compensation\u00a0is\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0has\u00a0to\u00a0prove\u00a0first\u00a0that\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0not\u00a0gainfully\u00a0<\/p>\n
employed\u00a0anywhere\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0period\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0out\u00a0of\u00a0service\u00a0and\u00a0this\u00a0burden\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
proof\u00a0is\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0concerned\u00a0workman.\u00a0If\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0does\u00a0not\u00a0prove\u00a0the\u00a0said\u00a0<\/p>\n
fact \u00a0 by \u00a0 cogent \u00a0 evidence \u00a0 then \u00a0 no \u00a0 back \u00a0 wages \u00a0 can \u00a0 be \u00a0 allowed. \u00a0 He \u00a0 further\u00a0<\/p>\n
submitted\u00a0that\u00a0before\u00a0awarding\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0the\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0has\u00a0to\u00a0come\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0<\/p>\n
conclusion\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0was\u00a0unemployed\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0period\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0out\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
service.\u00a0Therefore,\u00a0the\u00a0findings\u00a0in\u00a0this\u00a0regard\u00a0is\u00a0must\u00a0whereas\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0present\u00a0<\/p>\n
case\u00a0neither\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0adduced\u00a0any\u00a0evidence\u00a0before\u00a0the\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0<\/p>\n
effect \u00a0 that \u00a0 he \u00a0 was \u00a0 not \u00a0 employed \u00a0 gainfully \u00a0 during \u00a0 the \u00a0 period \u00a0 he \u00a0 was \u00a0 out \u00a0 of\u00a0<\/p>\n
service\u00a0nor\u00a0there\u00a0is\u00a0any\u00a0finding\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0in\u00a0that\u00a0regard\u00a0and,\u00a0therefore,\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0petitioner’s\u00a0claim\u00a0for\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0cannot\u00a0be\u00a0allowed.                   \u00a0\n<\/p>\n
 6.            I\u00a0have\u00a0gone\u00a0through\u00a0the\u00a0decisions\u00a0cited\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0respective\u00a0parties\u00a0<\/p>\n
and \u00a0 after \u00a0 going \u00a0 through \u00a0 the \u00a0 said \u00a0 decisions \u00a0 it \u00a0 appears \u00a0 to\u00a0 me \u00a0 that \u00a0 no \u00a0 doubt\u00a0<\/p>\n
earlier\u00a0the\u00a0view\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Supreme\u00a0Court\u00a0was\u00a0that\u00a0once\u00a0the\u00a0termination\u00a0is\u00a0found\u00a0<\/p>\n
to\u00a0be\u00a0illegal,\u00a0consequential\u00a0order\u00a0for\u00a0grant\u00a0of\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0was\u00a0must\u00a0except\u00a0for\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0reasons\u00a0justifying\u00a0a\u00a0departure\u00a0from\u00a0normal\u00a0order,\u00a0as\u00a0was\u00a0held\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0case\u00a0<\/p>\n
of\u00a0“Manorma\u00a0Verma\u00a0(Smt)\u00adversus\u00ad\u00a0State\u00a0of\u00a0Bihar\u00a0&\u00a0Others,\u00a0reported\u00a0in \u00a0<\/p>\n
(1994) \u00a0 Supp \u00a0 (3), \u00a0 SCC, \u00a0 671″. \u00a0 But, \u00a0 subsequently, \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 case \u00a0 of \u00a0 ” \u00a0General \u00a0<\/p>\n
Manager, \u00a0 Haryana \u00a0 Roadways\u00adversus\u00ad \u00a0 Rudhan \u00a0 Singh, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0<\/p>\n
(2005)5 \u00a0 SCC \u00a0 591″, \u00a0the \u00a0 Supreme \u00a0 Court \u00a0 has \u00a0 held \u00a0 that \u00a0 there \u00a0 is \u00a0 no \u00a0 rule \u00a0 of\u00a0<\/p>\n
thumb \u00a0 that \u00a0 in \u00a0 every \u00a0 case \u00a0 where \u00a0 Industrial \u00a0 Tribunal \u00a0 gives \u00a0 finding \u00a0 that\u00a0<\/p>\n
termination\u00a0of\u00a0service\u00a0was\u00a0bad,\u00a0entire\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0should\u00a0be\u00a0awarded.\u00a0Order\u00a0<\/p>\n
for\u00a0payment\u00a0of\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0should\u00a0not\u00a0be\u00a0passed\u00a0in\u00a0mechanical\u00a0manner\u00a0but\u00a0a\u00a0<\/p>\n
host\u00a0of\u00a0factors\u00a0have\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0considered.\n<\/p>\n
              Same\u00a0view\u00a0was\u00a0taken\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0Supreme\u00a0Court\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0case\u00a0of\u00a0“Muir \u00a0<\/p>\n
Mills \u00a0 Unit \u00a0 of \u00a0 NTC \u00a0 (U.P.) \u00a0 Ltd.\u00ad \u00a0 versus\u00ad \u00a0 Swayam \u00a0 Prakash \u00a0 Srivastava \u00a0 & \u00a0<\/p>\n
Another,\u00a0reported\u00a0in\u00a0(2007)\u00a01\u00a0SCC\u00a0491”,\u00a0wherein\u00a0it\u00a0was\u00a0held\u00a0that\u00a0payment\u00a0<\/p>\n
of\u00a0full\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0is\u00a0not\u00a0a\u00a0natural\u00a0consequence\u00a0of\u00a0setting\u00a0aside\u00a0an\u00a0order\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
termination\u00a0of\u00a0\u00a0services.\n<\/p>\n
              In \u00a0 the \u00a0 case \u00a0 of \u00a0 “J.K.Synthetics \u00a0 Ltd.\u00adversus\u00ad \u00a0 K.P. \u00a0 Agrawal \u00a0 & \u00a0<\/p>\n
Another, \u00a0 reported \u00a0 in \u00a0 (2007) \u00a0 2 \u00a0 SCC \u00a0 433”, \u00a0 the \u00a0 Supreme \u00a0 Court \u00a0 held \u00a0 as\u00a0<\/p>\n
follows:\u00ad<\/p>\n
                      “The \u00a0 manner \u00a0 in \u00a0 which \u00a0 “back \u00a0 wages” \u00a0 is \u00a0 viewed, \u00a0 has\u00a0
\n                      undergone\u00a0a\u00a0significant\u00a0change\u00a0in\u00a0the\u00a0last\u00a0two\u00a0decades.\u00a0
\n                      They \u00a0 are \u00a0 no \u00a0 longer \u00a0 considered \u00a0 to \u00a0 be \u00a0 an \u00a0 automatic \u00a0 or\u00a0
\n                      natural \u00a0 consequence \u00a0 of \u00a0 reinstatement. \u00a0 There \u00a0 has \u00a0 also\u00a0
\n                      been\u00a0a\u00a0noticeable\u00a0shift\u00a0in\u00a0placing\u00a0the\u00a0burden\u00a0of\u00a0proof\u00a0in\u00a0
\n                      regard\u00a0to\u00a0back\u00a0wages.\u00a0There\u00a0is\u00a0also\u00a0a\u00a0misconception\u00a0that\u00a0
\n                      whenever \u00a0 reinstatement \u00a0 is \u00a0 directed, \u00a0 “continuity \u00a0 of\u00a0
\n                      service”\u00a0and\u00a0“consequential\u00a0benefits”\u00a0should\u00a0follow,\u00a0as\u00a0a\u00a0
\n                       matter \u00a0 of \u00a0 course. \u00a0 The \u00a0 disastrous \u00a0 effect \u00a0 of \u00a0 granting\u00a0
\n                      several \u00a0 promotions \u00a0 as \u00a0 a \u00a0 “consequential \u00a0 benefit” \u00a0 to \u00a0 a\u00a0
\n                      person\u00a0who\u00a0has\u00a0not\u00a0worked\u00a0for\u00a010\u00a0to\u00a015\u00a0years\u00a0and\u00a0who\u00a0
\n                      does \u00a0 not \u00a0 have \u00a0 the \u00a0 benefit \u00a0 of \u00a0 necessary \u00a0 experience \u00a0 for\u00a0
\n                      discharging \u00a0 the \u00a0 higher \u00a0 duties \u00a0 and \u00a0 functions \u00a0 of\u00a0
\n                      promotional \u00a0 posts, \u00a0 is \u00a0 seldom \u00a0 visualised \u00a0 while \u00a0 granting\u00a0
\n                      consequential \u00a0 benefits \u00a0 automatically. \u00a0 Whenever \u00a0 courts\u00a0
\n                      or \u00a0 tribunals \u00a0 direct \u00a0 reinstatement, \u00a0 they \u00a0 should \u00a0 apply\u00a0
\n                      their \u00a0 judicial \u00a0 mind \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 facts \u00a0 and \u00a0 circumstances \u00a0 to\u00a0
\n                      decide \u00a0 whether \u00a0 “continuity \u00a0 of \u00a0 service” \u00a0 and\/or\u00a0
\n                      “consequential\u00a0benefits”\u00a0should\u00a0also\u00a0be\u00a0directed.\n<\/p>\n
                              Even\u00a0if\u00a0the\u00a0court\u00a0finds\u00a0it\u00a0necessary\u00a0to\u00a0award\u00a0back\u00a0
\n                      wages,\u00a0the\u00a0question\u00a0will\u00a0be\u00a0whether\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0should\u00a0
\n                      be \u00a0 awarded \u00a0 fully \u00a0 or \u00a0 only \u00a0 partially \u00a0 (and \u00a0 if \u00a0 so \u00a0 the\u00a0
\n                      percentage). \u00a0 That \u00a0 depends \u00a0 upon \u00a0 the \u00a0 facts \u00a0 and\u00a0
\n                      circumstances\u00a0of\u00a0each\u00a0case.\u00a0Any\u00a0income\u00a0received\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0
\n                      employee \u00a0 during \u00a0 the \u00a0 relevant \u00a0 period \u00a0 on \u00a0 account \u00a0 of\u00a0
\n                      alternative\u00a0employment\u00a0or\u00a0business\u00a0is\u00a0a\u00a0relevant\u00a0factor\u00a0
\n                      to \u00a0 be \u00a0 taken \u00a0 note \u00a0 of \u00a0 while \u00a0 awarding \u00a0 back \u00a0 wages.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n
                      Therefore,\u00a0it\u00a0is\u00a0necessary\u00a0for\u00a0the\u00a0employee\u00a0to\u00a0plead\u00a0that\u00a0
\n                      he \u00a0 was \u00a0 not \u00a0 gainfully \u00a0 employed \u00a0 from \u00a0 the \u00a0 date \u00a0 of \u00a0 his\u00a0
\n                      termination. \u00a0 While \u00a0 an \u00a0 employee \u00a0 cannot \u00a0 be \u00a0 asked \u00a0 to\u00a0
\n                      proved \u00a0 the \u00a0 negative, \u00a0 he \u00a0 has\u00a0 to \u00a0 at\u00a0 least \u00a0 assert\u00a0 on \u00a0 oath\u00a0
\n                      that\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0neither\u00a0employed\u00a0nor\u00a0engaged\u00a0in\u00a0any\u00a0gainful\u00a0
\n                      business \u00a0 or \u00a0 venture \u00a0 and \u00a0 that \u00a0 he \u00a0 did \u00a0 not \u00a0 have \u00a0 any\u00a0
\n                      income.\u00a0Then\u00a0the\u00a0burden\u00a0will\u00a0shift\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0employer.\u00a0But\u00a0
\n                      there \u00a0 is, \u00a0 however, \u00a0 no \u00a0 obligation \u00a0 on \u00a0 the \u00a0 terminated\u00a0
\n                      employee \u00a0 to \u00a0 search \u00a0 for \u00a0 or \u00a0 secure \u00a0 alternative\u00a0
\n                      employment.”\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.            In\u00a0view \u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0aforesaid\u00a0decisions \u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Supreme\u00a0Court \u00a0noticed\u00a0<\/p>\n
above,\u00a0there\u00a0is\u00a0no\u00a0doubt\u00a0in\u00a0my\u00a0mind\u00a0that\u00a0awarding\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0full\u00a0or\u00a0part\u00a0<\/p>\n
depends\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0facts\u00a0and\u00a0circumstances\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0each\u00a0case.\u00a0There\u00a0is\u00a0no\u00a0hard\u00a0<\/p>\n
and \u00a0 fast \u00a0 rule \u00a0 that \u00a0 only \u00a0 because \u00a0 the \u00a0 termination \u00a0 is \u00a0 set \u00a0 aside \u00a0 holding \u00a0 to \u00a0 be\u00a0
\n       illegal,\u00a0the\u00a0award\u00a0of\u00a0full\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0as\u00a0consequential\u00a0benefit\u00a0is\u00a0must.<\/p>\n
                    \u00a0It\u00a0is\u00a0for\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0to\u00a0plead\u00a0first\u00a0in\u00a0his\u00a0pleading\u00a0that\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0not\u00a0<\/p>\n
      gainfully\u00a0employed\u00a0any\u00a0where\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0period\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0out\u00a0of\u00a0service\u00a0and\u00a0\u00a0if\u00a0<\/p>\n
      such\u00a0statements\u00a0on\u00a0behalf\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0is\u00a0made\u00a0then\u00a0the\u00a0onus\u00a0to\u00a0rebut\u00a0the\u00a0<\/p>\n
      said\u00a0plea\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0shifts\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0employer..<\/p>\n
      8.            \u00a0 In \u00a0 the \u00a0 present \u00a0 case, \u00a0 from \u00a0 the \u00a0 pleadings \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 concerned\u00a0<\/p>\n
      workman,\u00a0 i.e. \u00a0the \u00a0petitioner \u00a0before \u00a0the\u00a0 Industrial\u00a0Tribunal, \u00a0which \u00a0has\u00a0 been\u00a0<\/p>\n
      annexed \u00a0with\u00a0this\u00a0writ\u00a0petition,\u00a0I\u00a0do\u00a0not\u00a0find\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner \u00a0has\u00a0stated\u00a0<\/p>\n
      anything\u00a0that\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0not\u00a0gainfully\u00a0employed\u00a0at\u00a0any\u00a0place\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0period\u00a0he\u00a0<\/p>\n
      was \u00a0 out \u00a0 of \u00a0 service. \u00a0 Even \u00a0 otherwise \u00a0 from \u00a0 the \u00a0 side \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 Management \u00a0 also\u00a0<\/p>\n
      nothing\u00a0has\u00a0been\u00a0brought\u00a0on\u00a0record\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0workman\u00a0was\u00a0gainfully\u00a0employed\u00a0<\/p>\n
      somewhere. \u00a0 From \u00a0 the \u00a0 impugned \u00a0 award \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 Industrial \u00a0 Tribunal \u00a0 also \u00a0 it\u00a0<\/p>\n
      appears \u00a0 that \u00a0 he \u00a0 has \u00a0 also \u00a0 not \u00a0 assigned \u00a0 any \u00a0 reason \u00a0 for \u00a0 not \u00a0 awarding \u00a0 back\u00a0<\/p>\n
      wages.\n<\/p>\n
      9.            Considering\u00a0the\u00a0above\u00a0facts\u00a0as\u00a0well\u00a0as\u00a0the\u00a0fact\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0concerned\u00a0<\/p>\n
      workman\u00a0has\u00a0now\u00a0retired\u00a0from\u00a0service\u00a0in\u00a0June\u00a02009\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0pendency\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
      this\u00a0writ\u00a0petition\u00a0and\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0reinstated\u00a0in\u00a0service\u00a0in\u00a02005\u00ad2006,\u00a0in\u00a0my\u00a0view,\u00a0<\/p>\n
      for \u00a0the\u00a0 ends \u00a0 of\u00a0 justice, \u00a0 the\u00a0petitioner \u00a0should \u00a0 be\u00a0 awarded \u00a025 \u00a0%\u00a0 of\u00a0 the \u00a0back\u00a0<\/p>\n
      wages\u00a0for\u00a0the\u00a0period\u00a0he\u00a0was\u00a0out\u00a0of\u00a0service,\u00a0i.e.\u00a0from\u00a0the\u00a0date\u00a0of\u00a0his\u00a0termination\u00a0<\/p>\n
      till\u00a0the\u00a0date\u00a0of\u00a0his\u00a0reinstatement\u00a0in\u00a0service.\u00a0Accordingly,\u00a0the\u00a0respondents\u00a0are\u00a0<\/p>\n
      directed\u00a0to\u00a0pay\u00a025%\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0back\u00a0wages\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner\u00a0within\u00a0a\u00a0period\u00a0of\u00a0one\u00a0<\/p>\n
      month\u00a0from\u00a0today.\n<\/p>\n
                    With \u00a0 the \u00a0 above \u00a0 modification \u00a0 in \u00a0 the \u00a0 impugned \u00a0 order, \u00a0 the \u00a0 writ\u00a0<\/p>\n
      petition\u00a0stands\u00a0disposed\u00a0of\u00a0but\u00a0without\u00a0any\u00a0cost.<\/p>\n
                                                                \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0(Amareshwar\u00a0Sahay,\u00a0J)<\/p>\n
Mukund\/\u00ad\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010 IN\u00a0THE\u00a0HIGH\u00a0COURT\u00a0OF\u00a0JHARKHAND\u00a0AT\u00a0RANCHI W.P.\u00a0(L)\u00a0No.\u00a03246\u00a0of\u00a02001 Bhubaneshwar\u00a0Mallick………………… Petitioner Versus 1. Employer\u00a0in\u00a0relation\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0Management\u00a0of\u00a0Central\u00a0Coal\u00a0Fields\u00a0Limited,\u00a0 Ranchi 2. The\u00a0Presiding\u00a0Officer,\u00a0Central\u00a0Government\u00a0Industrial\u00a0Tribunal\u00a0(No.\u00a02),\u00a0 Dhanbad………………… Respondents …… Coram:\u00a0The\u00a0Hon’ble\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Justice\u00a0Amareshwar\u00a0Sahay …… For\u00a0the\u00a0petitioner :\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Rajiv\u00a0Ranjan,\u00a0Advocate For\u00a0the\u00a0Respondents :\u00a0Mr.\u00a0Ananda\u00a0Sen,\u00a0Advocate.\u00a0 …… O\u00a0R\u00a0D\u00a0E\u00a0R C.A.V.\u00a0on\u00a006\/11\/2009\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Delivered\u00a0on\u00a017\/03\/2010 20\/\u00a017.03.2010 Heard\u00a0the\u00a0parties. 2. The \u00a0 petitioner, \u00a0 i.e. \u00a0 the \u00a0 concerned \u00a0 workman \u00a0 has \u00a0 […]<\/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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 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\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-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=\"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-14T10:04:48+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\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-14T10:04:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1419,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-14T10:04:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 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\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-14T10:04:48+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\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-14T10:04:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010"},"wordCount":1419,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010","name":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-14T10:04:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhubneshwar-singh-vs-employers-in-relation-to-the-on-17-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhubneshwar Singh vs Employers In Relation To The on 17 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62766","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=62766"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62766\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62766"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62766"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62766"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}