{"id":76183,"date":"2006-07-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-07-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006"},"modified":"2016-03-27T03:02:27","modified_gmt":"2016-03-26T21:32:27","slug":"gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","title":{"rendered":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: .Ar.Lakshmanan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dr.Ar.Lakshmanan, Lokeshwar Singh Panta<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  1396 of 2006\n\nPETITIONER:\nGYANENDRA SAHAY\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/S. TATA IRON &amp; STEEL CO. LTD.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/07\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nDr.AR.LAKSHMANAN &amp; LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThis appeal is directed against the order passed by the Division Bench<br \/>\nof the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi allowing the appeal filed by the<br \/>\nrespondent herein.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t1)  The appellant was appointed as Management Trainee with the<br \/>\nrespondent-company.  He was confirmed as Executive Assistant in the Office of<br \/>\nController of Budgets at Jamshedpur.  He was transferred to in the Mines Unit<br \/>\nin August, 1989. On 23.02.1994, he was posted to perform his duties in the<br \/>\nEngineering Cell.  \t2) According to the respondent herein, the appellant<br \/>\nsubmitted an application on 01.04.1995 for his premature\/voluntary retirement<br \/>\nwith a request to consider his case for payment of ex-gratia amount, in view of<br \/>\nhis long association with the company.  The application for voluntary retirement<br \/>\nwas accepted on the same day i.e. 1st April, 1995.  According to the appellant,<br \/>\nhe was compelled to retire prematurely and was compelled to submit<br \/>\napplication  for compulsory retirement due to undue and excessive pressure,<br \/>\nexercised by officers of the company.  The appellant made request to re-<br \/>\nconsider his case sympathetically  and reinstate him in service by revoking the<br \/>\nretirement given to him and transfer him back to Jamshedpur in any suitable<br \/>\nDepartment and also pay his increment for January, 1994 and January, 1995.<br \/>\nThe prayer was made to the management to consider his case sympathetically,<br \/>\nspecially because his entire settlement has been adjusted against his building<br \/>\nloan with the result that after working for 15 years in the respondent-company,<br \/>\nhe does not know how to manage my family.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3)  The respondent by letter dt.22.06.1995 rejected the request of the<br \/>\nappellant stating that since the appellant has resigned from service of the<br \/>\ncompany from 1st April, 1995 and that his resignation has been accepted, it will<br \/>\nnot be possible to consider his case for employment in the company.  The<br \/>\nappellant raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court under the Bihar<br \/>\nShops &amp; Establishments Act contending that his resignation was not voluntary<br \/>\nand he was forced to submit the application for premature\/voluntary retirement.<br \/>\nThe preliminary issue as to the maintainability of the matter before the Labour<br \/>\nCourt was also raised which was overruled by the Labour Court.  Finally, the<br \/>\nLabour Court held that the appellant is entitled to relief of reinstatement in<br \/>\nservice with full back wages and other consequential benefits.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4)  Aggrieved by the award passed by the Labour Court, the respondent<br \/>\npreferred Civil Writ Petition No.3802 of 1999 before the High Court of Judicature<br \/>\nat Patna, Ranchi Bench. Learned Single Judge of the said court after<br \/>\nconsidering rival contentions was of the opinion that since the resignation was<br \/>\naccepted on the same day and the complainant-appellant was relieved on the<br \/>\nsame day, the same was  quite unnatural and that by itself created a doubt in<br \/>\nthe mind of the court.  The learned Single Jude also held that the appellant was<br \/>\ncoerced to submit his resignation letter and the same was accepted on the<br \/>\nsame day and, therefore, it was not voluntary and it will amount of illegal<br \/>\ntermination of services of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5)  On being aggrieved, the respondent preferred an appeal before the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the High Court.  The Division Bench by its judgment<br \/>\ndt.24.01.2005 allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein.  Aggrieved by<br \/>\nthe said judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court, the appellant has<br \/>\ncome before this Court by filing the Special Leave Petition No.9744\/2005.  Leave<br \/>\nwas granted by this Court on 24.02.2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6)  The appellant-in-person has argued his case. He invited our attention<br \/>\nto various letters and correspondence that were exchanged between the<br \/>\nappellant and the respondent-company and also drew our attention to the order<br \/>\npassed by the Labour Court, the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench.<br \/>\nHe also invited our attention to the evidence led before the Labour Court.  Since<br \/>\nthe appellant is a party-in-person, we allowed him to argue this case at length<br \/>\nand gave him a full and patient hearing.  The appellant reiterated the grounds<br \/>\nraised in the Civil Appeal at the time of hearing and submitted that he was<br \/>\nsummoned to Jamshedpur and compelled to submit the letter of<br \/>\npremature\/voluntary retirement.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7)  We have also heard Mr.Raju Ramachandran, learned senior counsel<br \/>\nfor the respondent.  He also explained the circumstances under which the letter<br \/>\nof resignation was accepted.  According to Mr.Raju Ramachandran, after the<br \/>\nresignation was accepted, the management has paid his entire retiral benefits<br \/>\nto the appellant herein.  Mr. Ramachandran also submitted that even though the<br \/>\nappellant has submitted his letter of premature\/voluntary retirement on<br \/>\n01.04.1995, he represented to the management after 48 days requesting them to<br \/>\nre-consider his request for premature\/voluntary retirement and reinstate him in<br \/>\nservice.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8)  The only issue which arises for re-consideration is whether the<br \/>\nappellant was compelled to write and sign the application for<br \/>\npremature\/voluntary retirement due to undue and excessive pressure,<br \/>\nexercised by officers of the respondent-company.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9)  We have carefully read the judgment passed by the learned Judges<br \/>\nof the Division Bench of the High Court.  The learned Judges while rejecting the<br \/>\ncontention of the appellant herein have given cogent and convincing reasons in<br \/>\narriving at the conclusion in the appeal.  This apart, the appellant in his own<br \/>\nhandwriting submitted the letter dt.01.04.1995 for premature\/voluntary<br \/>\nretirement which was accepted on the same day.  When the letter was written in<br \/>\nthe handwriting of the appellant and presented the same in-person to the<br \/>\nauthority concerned, it cannot be said that the service of the respondent was<br \/>\ndispensed with  by the respondent-employer unauthorisedly.  \t10)  We have<br \/>\ncarefully perused the letter dt.01.04.1995 which reads thus :-<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\t\"G.M.(O.M.&amp; Q)\n\t  N.I.M.\t\t\t\t\tDt.1.4.95\n\tDear Sir,\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tI have been working with the Company for the last 15 years.  Now I<br \/>\nwish to retire prematurely from the Company with all retiring<br \/>\nbenefits.  I would also request the company to consider paying me<br \/>\nsome Ex-gratia amount considering my long association with the<br \/>\nCompany.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThanking you,<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t       Yours faithfully<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t      Sd\/-Gyanendra Sahay<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t  (GYANENDRA SAHAY)<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tP.NO.110017<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\tDy.Manager (Admn.)&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11)  The above request was accepted by the General Manager on the<br \/>\nsame date i.e.1st April, 1995 and the following letter was handed over to the<br \/>\nrespondent, accepting his premature\/voluntary retirement.  The said letter<br \/>\nreads as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;THE TATA IRON AND STEEL COMPANY LIMITED<br \/>\n\t\t\t\tJAMSHEDPUR 831001 INDIA<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t                  AO\/6458\/95<br \/>\nMr.Gyanendra Sahay<br \/>\nP.No.110017<br \/>\nDy.Manager(Admn.)<br \/>\nMines Division,<br \/>\nNoamundi<\/p>\n<p>Dear Mr.Sahay,<\/p>\n<p>Re:-Your letter dt.1.4.95<\/p>\n<p>Kindly refer to your letter of 1.4.95.  After due consideration, and also<br \/>\nkeeping in view your long association, the Company has agreed, as a<br \/>\nspecial case, to retire you as requested by you with immediate effect.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>You will be entitled to all the retiral benefits of the Company which<br \/>\nwould have otherwise been available to you at your superannuation.<br \/>\nIn addition, your request for ex-gratia is being considered separately.\n<\/p>\n<p>Please get in touch with the General Manager (Finance &amp; Accounts)<br \/>\nfor your full and final settlement.\n<\/p>\n<p>We wish you and your family the very best in life.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\tYours sincerely,<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/- (illegible)<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t(M.Fasihuddin)<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tGeneral Manager (O M &amp; Q)&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12)\tIt is seen from the said letter that the request for<br \/>\npremature\/voluntary retirement was accepted by the management on<br \/>\n01.04.1995 with immediate effect. The letter also clearly states that the<br \/>\nappellant will be entitled to all the retiral benefits of the Company which<br \/>\nwould have otherwise been available to him at his superannuation.  The<br \/>\nmanagement has also stated that the appellant&#8217;s request for ex-gratia is<br \/>\nbeing considered separately. By the said letter, the appellant was directed to<br \/>\nget in touch with the General Manager (Finance &amp; Accounts) for his full and<br \/>\nfinal settlement.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13)\tIn this context, it is useful to refer page 96 of the appeal<br \/>\npaperbook which was marked as Annexure P-5 which is a letter dt.12.4.1995<br \/>\naddressed to the appellant.  It is stated in the letter that the management has<br \/>\ndecided to extend the following facilities to the appellant on his premature<br \/>\nretirement :-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;1.Retiring Gratuity as per rules for the actual \t  service rendered<br \/>\nby you.\n<\/p>\n<p>2\tProvident Fund, including Co.&#8217;s contribution in full.<br \/>\n3\tSuperannuation Fund, as per rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>4\tPayment of cash, equivalent to the privilege and furlough leave<br \/>\nincluding proportionate leave due to you.\n<\/p>\n<p>5\tFree medical facilities as applicable to the retiring officers in<br \/>\nthe respective divisions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn addition to the above, you will be eligible for an ex-grade payment,<br \/>\ndetails of which will be available with DM (Accounts), Mines Division.<br \/>\nYou may kindly contact him on any working day during office hours.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14)\tWe have also perused the Memo of Appeal and other<br \/>\nrepresentation made by the appellant.  The appellant has made<br \/>\na vague allegation that he was forced to take retirement.  Neither he has<br \/>\nmade it specific nor had  given the name of any officer who compelled him to<br \/>\nwrite the letter dt.1st April, 1995 or exercised undue and excessive pressure<br \/>\nto sign the letter of premature\/voluntary retirement.  Though the Labour<br \/>\nCourt has come to the conclusion that the appellant was compelled to submit<br \/>\nthe letter of resignation, the same is not supported by any acceptable<br \/>\nevidence.  It is settled law that suspicion and doubt cannot take the place of<br \/>\nevidence.  No finding of fact can be given on mere doubt and suspicion or on<br \/>\nthe basis of baseless allegations.  The appellant having written letter of<br \/>\nvoluntary retirement and after having accepted the retiral benefits without<br \/>\nany protest cannot now turn round and say that he was compelled to submit<br \/>\nhis premature\/voluntary retirement.  The appeal has absolutely no merits and<br \/>\nwe, therefore, have no hesitation to dismiss the same and to affirm  the order<br \/>\npassed by the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court.  No<br \/>\norder as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15)\tIt is submitted by Mr.Raju Ramachandran, learned senior<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondent that all the retiral benefits including ex-gratia has<br \/>\nbeen paid and settled to the appellant.  On the other hand, the appellant-in-<br \/>\nperson states that all the retiral benefits as per the Terms of Accptance have<br \/>\nnot been paid fully to him.  If there is any amount due, the appellant is at<br \/>\nliberty to approach the respondent-management by making a representation<br \/>\nclaiming the said amount.  If such a claim is made, the management is<br \/>\ndirected to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance<br \/>\nwith law.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 Author: .Ar.Lakshmanan Bench: Dr.Ar.Lakshmanan, Lokeshwar Singh Panta CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1396 of 2006 PETITIONER: GYANENDRA SAHAY RESPONDENT: M\/S. TATA IRON &amp; STEEL CO. LTD. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/07\/2006 BENCH: Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN &amp; LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA JUDGMENT: J [&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-76183","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>Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - 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\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-26T21:32:27+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\\\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-26T21:32:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1736,\"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\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\",\"name\":\"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\\\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-26T21:32:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\\\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - 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\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-26T21:32:27+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006","datePublished":"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-26T21:32:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006"},"wordCount":1736,"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\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006","name":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-26T21:32:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gyanendra-sahay-vs-ms-tata-iron-steel-co-ltd-on-13-july-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gyanendra Sahay vs M\/S. Tata Iron &amp; Steel Co. Ltd on 13 July, 2006"}]},{"@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\/76183","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=76183"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76183\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76183"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76183"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76183"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}