{"id":643,"date":"2020-04-23T10:30:07","date_gmt":"2020-04-23T10:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/?p=643"},"modified":"2021-01-17T04:03:31","modified_gmt":"2021-01-17T04:03:31","slug":"it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/","title":{"rendered":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Ravikiran Shukre | Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad | 25th February 2020<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Case: Uttam R. Patil v. The\nState of Maharashtra and Ors. (Writ Petition no. 4959 of 2017)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Facts of the case: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. The\npetitioner has been working in the post of lecturer in Marathi N.K. Varadkar\nArt and R.V. Belose Commerce College, Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri. Since 1st<\/sup>\nJuly, 1992. The Petitioner had been selected for the post of lecturer in\nMarathi in the said college after interview by the duly constituted Selection\nCommittee against the open post. It is stated in the Petition that during the\nsaid year 1992 the Selection Committee although formed and interviews fixed,\nthe subject expert did not attend the interview. Thus, the Selection Committee\nprocedure was completed during the next year.<\/li>
  2. However,\nthe selection relates back to the initial appointment i.e. on 1st July, 1992.\nThe Petitioner after working in the post of lecturer for about three academic\nyears, the management of the college terminated his services on 20th April,\n1995. The Petitioner filed Appeal No.24 of 1995 before the University and\nCollege Tribunal, Mumbai challenging the said termination. The University and\nCollege Tribunal, Mumbai allowed the Appeal by an order dated 20th June, 1996\nthereby setting aside termination and directed the management to continue the\nPetitioner\u2019s services and pay him the wages due to him.<\/li>
  3. The\nPetition refers to a letter dated 26th March, 2008 sent by the University of\nMumbai by which the Respondent No.4 was intimated that the Petitioner was\nexempted from NET \/ SET qualification. It is stated in the said letter that\nsince no NET qualified \/ NET exempted candidate was available at the time of\ninterview, exemption may be granted for U.G. teaching only in respect of the\ntwo named candidates, which included the Petitioner as a teacher in the subject\nof Marathi. <\/li>
  4. Government\nResolution dated 27th June, 2013. By the said GR, it was clarified that the\nprior GR dated 19th September, 1991 which was made applicable on 23rd October 1992\ncannot be applied with retrospective effect. The said GR dated 27th June, 2013\nexpressly states that the NET \/ SET requirement would not be applicable to the\nteachers who were appointed prior to 23rd October, 1992. The Petitioner having\nbeen appointed on 1st July, 1992 i.e. prior to 23rd October, 1992 is exempt\nfrom the NET \/ SET requirement.<\/li>
  5. Being\naggrieved by the decision of the University of Mumbai, granting approval to the\nappointment of the Petitioner with effect from the date he completed his M.Phil\non 10th August, 1994 and the Respondent not according approval of the\nPetitioner from the date of his appointment i.e. 1st July, 1992, the Petitioner\nhas filed the present Petition.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Judgment:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. The\njudgment of the University and College Tribunal which had attained finality\nclearly held that there was no dispute in so far as the Petitioner being\nappointed by letter dated 27th<\/sup> August, 1992 against open category\nafter giving advertisement in the newspaper. His appointment was effective from\n1st July, 1992. It was also noticed that the University whilst according\napproval had not mentioned that the appointment is either on ad hoc or on\ntemporary basis because of the non-passing of the NET \/ SET examination. It was\nan open category advertisement and it was held that the word used \u2018temporary\u2019\nor \u2018ad hoc\u2019 appeared to be a device to enable the management to throw out an\nemployee as has been done in present case. It was thus held that, the\njustification given by management for terminating the services of the\nPetitioner was not sound and was accordingly set aside.<\/li>
    2. Hon\u2019ble\nHigh Court has upheld the judgment given by the University and College Tribunal\nand held that, this judgment and the findings on facts therein are binding upon\nthe University of Mumbai and the management staff of the college. The\npetitioner therefore entitled to be accorded regular approval with effect from\n1st<\/sup> July, 1992, which would be date of his appointment as a full\ntime lecturer in Marathi in the said college. <\/li>
    3. Hon\u2019ble\nHigh Court also held that, the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of\nGR dated 27th<\/sup> june, 2013, and his appointment being prior to 23rd<\/sup>\nOctober, 1992, would be accorded as a regular approval from his appointment\ndate.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Hon\u2019ble High Court has held that, (i) Respondent no. 3\nshall accord regular approval w.e.f. 1st July, 1992 for the appointment of the\nPetitioner as full time lecturer in Marathi in the College. (ii) Respondent no.\n2 shall withdraw or cancel the approval letter dated 15th February, 2012\ngranting probation approval to the appointment of the Petitioner w.e.f. from\nthe date the Petitioner cleared the M.Phil i.e. on 10th August, 1994. (iii) Respondent\nNo.2 shall issue a fresh letter according regular approval to the appointment\nof the Petitioner w.e.f. 1st July, 1992. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

        <\/strong> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      Ravikiran Shukre | Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad | 25th February 2020 Case: Uttam R. Patil v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Writ Petition no. 4959 of 2017) Facts of the case: The petitioner has been working in the post of lecturer in Marathi N.K. Varadkar Art and R.V. Belose Commerce College, Dapoli, Dist. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":152,"featured_media":3144,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[26],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nIt cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti<\/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:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Ravikiran Shukre | Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad | 25th February 2020 Case: Uttam R. Patil v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Writ Petition no. 4959 of 2017) Facts of the case: The petitioner has been working in the post of lecturer in Marathi N.K. Varadkar Art and R.V. Belose Commerce College, Dapoli, Dist. […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LexForti\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Lexforti\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/supreme-court-of-india.jpg?fit=460%2C259&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"460\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"259\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ravi Shukre\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ravi Shukre\" \/>\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:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Ravi Shukre\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/3cd554da782183e9ad58819a54fbcbda\"},\"headline\":\"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution.\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\"},\"wordCount\":820,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court Judgement\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\",\"name\":\"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution.\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"LexForti\",\"description\":\"Legal\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization\",\"name\":\"LexForti Legal News & Journal\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/159134300345793876.png?fit=404%2C404&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/159134300345793876.png?fit=404%2C404&ssl=1\",\"width\":404,\"height\":404,\"caption\":\"LexForti Legal News & Journal\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Lexforti\/\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/lexforti\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/lex-forti\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/3cd554da782183e9ad58819a54fbcbda\",\"name\":\"Ravi Shukre\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/159134300345793876-96x96.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/159134300345793876-96x96.png\",\"caption\":\"Ravi Shukre\"},\"description\":\"NLC V Year Student at Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad. Currently working as a Student Contributor for the Maharashtra State with a group of activists, researchers, lawyers to make summaries of the Govt. Orders during the pandemic through a web-portal, so that, to make orders available with user friendly interface and summaries. Editor at JudicateMe Law Journal. Editor of the book \\\"Compilation of Cases on Civil Contempt of Court\\\" published in 2019.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/covid-india.in\/\",\"https:\/\/instagram.com\/ravikiranshukre?igshid=hmzvhzwzjo1b\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/author\/ravi-shukre\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti","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:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti","og_description":"Ravikiran Shukre | Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad | 25th February 2020 Case: Uttam R. Patil v. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Writ Petition no. 4959 of 2017) Facts of the case: The petitioner has been working in the post of lecturer in Marathi N.K. Varadkar Art and R.V. Belose Commerce College, Dapoli, Dist. […]","og_url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/","og_site_name":"LexForti","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Lexforti\/","article_published_time":"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":460,"height":259,"url":"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/supreme-court-of-india.jpg?fit=460%2C259&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ravi Shukre","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ravi Shukre","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/"},"author":{"name":"Ravi Shukre","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/3cd554da782183e9ad58819a54fbcbda"},"headline":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution.","datePublished":"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00","dateModified":"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/"},"wordCount":820,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court Judgement"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/","url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/","name":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution. - LexForti","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-04-23T10:30:07+00:00","dateModified":"2021-01-17T04:03:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/it-cannot-be-considered-to-be-a-satisfactory-reason-for-not-giving-effect-to-the-said-government-resolution-particularly-when-there-is-no-mention-of-a-stay-being-granted-to-the-government-resolution\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"It cannot be considered to be a satisfactory reason for not giving effect to the said Government Resolution particularly when there is no mention of a stay being granted to the Government Resolution."}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#website","url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/","name":"LexForti","description":"Legal","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#organization","name":"LexForti Legal News & Journal","url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/159134300345793876.png?fit=404%2C404&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/159134300345793876.png?fit=404%2C404&ssl=1","width":404,"height":404,"caption":"LexForti Legal News & Journal"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Lexforti\/","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/lexforti\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/lex-forti\/"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/3cd554da782183e9ad58819a54fbcbda","name":"Ravi Shukre","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/159134300345793876-96x96.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/159134300345793876-96x96.png","caption":"Ravi Shukre"},"description":"NLC V Year Student at Manikchand Pahade Law College, Aurangabad. Currently working as a Student Contributor for the Maharashtra State with a group of activists, researchers, lawyers to make summaries of the Govt. Orders during the pandemic through a web-portal, so that, to make orders available with user friendly interface and summaries. Editor at JudicateMe Law Journal. Editor of the book \"Compilation of Cases on Civil Contempt of Court\" published in 2019.","sameAs":["https:\/\/covid-india.in\/","https:\/\/instagram.com\/ravikiranshukre?igshid=hmzvhzwzjo1b"],"url":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/author\/ravi-shukre\/"}]}},"views":59,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/643"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/152"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=643"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/643\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7115,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/643\/revisions\/7115"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3144"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=643"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=643"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexforti.com\/legal-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=643"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}