{"id":114852,"date":"2007-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-12-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007"},"modified":"2018-06-26T12:43:39","modified_gmt":"2018-06-26T07:13:39","slug":"n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","title":{"rendered":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 06\/12\/2007\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA\n\n\nW.P.No.5281 of 2007\n(O.A.No.7408 of 1995)\n\n\t\nN.Pandikumar\t\t\t... \tPetitioner\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n1.The State of Tamil Nadu,\n  represented by\n  The Secretary to Government,\n  Rural Development Department,\n  Fort St.George,\n  Madras - 600 009.\n\n2.The Director of Rural Development,\n  Panagal Buildings,\n  Saidapet,\n  Madras - 600 015.\n\n3.The Collector,\n  Virudhunagar,\n  Kamarajar District.\n\n4.The Commissioner,\n  Narikudi Panchayat Union,\n  Narikudi,\n  Kamarajar District.\t\t... \tRespondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue\na Writ of Certriorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents\nresulting in the third respondents impugned order No.Na.Ka.B3\/3175\/95-1 dated\n22.09.1995 based on the first respondents impugned letter No.43090\/E5\/94-4 dated\n14.06.1995 and order of the fourth respondents in his No.Na.Ka.A1\/4485\/94 dated\n29.09.1995 quash the same and direct the respondents, (1) to reinstate the\napplicant in service forthwith, (2) to regularise the service of the applicant\nin Juinor Assistant with effect from eligible date and (3) to treat the period\nfrom 29.09.1995 to the date of reinstatement as duty with all attendant benefits\nand back wages.\n\n\n!For Petitioner \t...\tMr.V.R.Venkatesan\n\n\n^For Respondents\t...\tMr.So.Paramasivam\n\t\t\t\tSpecial Govt. Pleader\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioner filed Original Application in O.A.No.7408 of 1995 before<br \/>\nthe Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal; consequent upon its abolition, the said<br \/>\nOriginal Application was transferred to this court and re-numbered as W.P.5281<br \/>\nof 2007, to call for the records of the respondents resulting in the third<br \/>\nrespondents impugned order No.Na.Ka.B3\/3175\/95-1 dated 22.09.1995 based on the<br \/>\nfirst respondents impugned letter No.43090\/E5\/94-4 dated 14.06.1995 and order of<br \/>\nthe fourth respondents in his No.Na.Ka.A1\/4485\/94 dated 29.09.1995 quash the<br \/>\nsame and direct the respondents, (1) to reinstate the applicant in service<br \/>\nforthwith, (2) to regularise the service of the applicant in Juinor Assistant<br \/>\nwith effect from eligible date and (3) to treat the period from 29.09.1995 to<br \/>\nthe date of reinstatement as duty with all attendant benefits and back wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. Heard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The nutshell facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the<br \/>\ndisposal of this writ petition would run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe writ petitioner herein happened to be the son of deceased Dhanam<br \/>\nNatarajan who at the relevant time of her death worked as Assistant Teacher in<br \/>\nPanchayat Union Middle School, Thonugal,Kariapatty Union.  At the time of her<br \/>\ndeath, her husband namely Natarajan was working as Head Master in one other<br \/>\nschool.  The writ petitioner being the son of the deceased Dhanam Natarajan<br \/>\napplied for job on compassionate ground disclosing the true facts.  The copy of<br \/>\nthe application, which is found enclosed at page Nos.44 to 46 of the typed set,<br \/>\nwould demonstrate that  at page No.2 of it, he set out the facts  that his<br \/>\nfather Natarajan at the time of his application dated 25.02.1991 for job had got<br \/>\nretired on 30.06.1990. After considering the facts, the authorities concerned<br \/>\ngave employment on compassionate grounds after obtaining approval from the<br \/>\nCollector concerned.  Accordingly, the writ petitioner started working as Office<br \/>\nAssistant at Vembakottai Panchayat Union with effect from 03.08.1992.  When for<br \/>\nconfirmation, the papers were sent to the Director of Rural Developments vide<br \/>\nLr.No.P3.4767\/94 dated 11.07.1994, the Special Commissioner and Secretary to<br \/>\nGovernment, Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Madras-9, vide his<br \/>\ncommunication dated 14.06.1995 in Lr.No.43090\/E5\/94-4, directed thus:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;I am directed to invite attention to your letter cited and to state that<br \/>\non verification of records, it is seen that the husband of the deceased<br \/>\nTmt.Dhanam Natarajan was employed as a Headmaster even after the death of his<br \/>\nwife for about 14 years and has retired from service only on 30.06.1990.  As<br \/>\nsuch, the appointment of Thiru.N.Pandikumar as Junior Assistant cannot be<br \/>\nclassified as the one on compassionate grounds and is purely an irregular<br \/>\nappointment and also against the order of the Government under this scheme.  I<br \/>\nam, therefore, to request you to terminate the service of Thiru.N.Pandikumar<br \/>\nforthwith and send a report to Government immediately.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. Thereupon, the District Collector, in commensurate with the aforesaid<br \/>\ndirection of the Special Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Rural<br \/>\nDevelopment Department, Secretariat, Madras-9, issued proceedings dated<br \/>\n22.09.1995 removing the writ petitioner from the service.  Whereupon, the writ<br \/>\npetitioner herein filed O.A.No.7408 of 1995 before the Administrative Tribunal<br \/>\nand obtained stay and continues still in service.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. No counter has been filed.  However, the learned Additional Government<br \/>\nPleader argued the matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. The point for consideration is as to whether the appointment of the<br \/>\nwrit petitioner was illegal and ab initio void for the reasons set out in the<br \/>\ncommunication dated 14.06.1995 in Lr.No.43090\/E5\/94-4 issued by the Special<br \/>\nCommissioner and Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department,<br \/>\nSecretariat, Madras-9?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. The learned Counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that for no<br \/>\nfault on the part of the writ petitioner, he should not be made to suffer and<br \/>\nthat as on date, he has completed seventeen years of service and it would be a<br \/>\nbitter experience for him if he is terminated from service abruptly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. The Additional Government Pleader placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.155<br \/>\ndated 16.07.1993, would develop his argument that as on the date of the death of<br \/>\nthe mother of the writ petitioner, the petitioner&#8217;s father was in active<br \/>\nGovernment service as Headmaster and in such a case, the petitioner was not<br \/>\nentitled to any employment under compassionate grounds and owing to some errors<br \/>\ncommitted by the lower officials, the writ petitioner was appointed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. The perusal of the representation\/ application of the writ petitioner<br \/>\nseeking job under compassionate grounds would disclose all the relevant facts<br \/>\nincluding the one that his father got retired from service only on 30.06.1990.<br \/>\nEven though, there is no estoppel as against law and that if an appointment is<br \/>\nillegal one, it would be void ab initio, yet it has to be seen in this factual<br \/>\nmatrix as to whether the writ petitioner committed any fraud.  The answer is at<br \/>\nonce clear that he never made any misrepresentation and thereby obtained such<br \/>\nappointment.  Simply because, G.O.Ms.No.155 dated 16.07.1993 was not strictly<br \/>\nfollowed by the appointing authority concerned including the Collector, who is<br \/>\nindisputably and indubitably the District Head, the writ petitioner cannot be<br \/>\nmade to suffer and that too after 17 years of service as of now.  It is also the<br \/>\ncase of the writ petitioner that after the death of his mother Dhanam, his<br \/>\nfather Natarajan got remarried and that the writ petitioner was constrained to<br \/>\nlive away from his father without any support.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. However, the learned Additional Government Pleader would draw the<br \/>\nattention of this Court to the letter written by the father of the writ<br \/>\npetitioner to the effect that his son might be given job.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. Be that as it may, at the time of seeking employment, his father might<br \/>\nhave supported his cause.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. Now, the core question arises as to whether this case falls within the<br \/>\nembargoes contemplated in the decision of the Honourable Apex Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/912030\/\">M.P.State<br \/>\nCoop.Bank Ltd. v. Nanuram Yadav<\/a> reported in (2007) 8 Supreme Court Cases 264<br \/>\nwherein the Honourable Apex Court set out the following eight grounds as the<br \/>\nones which would disentitle the petitioner from seeking any remedy before the<br \/>\nCourt. An excerpt from it, would run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;24. It is clear that in the matter of public appointments, the following<br \/>\nprinciples are to be followed:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(1) The appointments made without following the appropriate procedure<br \/>\nunder the rules\/government circulars and without advertisement or inviting<br \/>\napplications from the open market would amount to breach of Articles 14 and 16<br \/>\nof the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(2) Regularisation cannot be a mode of appointment.<br \/>\n\t(3) An appointment made in violation of the mandatory provisions of the<br \/>\nstatue and in particular, ignoring the minimum educational qualification and<br \/>\nother essential qualification would be wholly illegal.  Such illegality cannot<br \/>\nbe cured by taking recourse to regularisation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(4) Those who come by back door should go through that door.<br \/>\n\t(5) No regularisation is permissible in exercise of the statutory power<br \/>\nconferred under Article 162 of the Constitution of India if the appointments<br \/>\nhave been made in contravention of the statutory rules.<br \/>\n\t(6) The Court should not exercise its jurisdiction on misplaced sympathy.<br \/>\n\t(7) If the mischief played is so widespread and all pervasive, affecting<br \/>\nthe result, so as to make it difficult to pick out the persons who have been<br \/>\nunlawfully benefited or wrongfully deprived of their selection, it will neither<br \/>\nbe possible nor necesary to issue individual show-cause notice to each selectee.<br \/>\nThe only way out would be to cancel the whole selection.<br \/>\n\t(8) When the entire selection is stinking, conceived in fraud and<br \/>\ndelivered in deceit, individual innocence has no place and the entire selection<br \/>\nhas to be set aside.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. A mere analysis of the facts on record would demonstrate that the case<br \/>\nat hand is not covered by any one of the eight embargoes contemplated in the<br \/>\naforesaid decision of the Honourable Apex Court.  While holding so, I do not lay<br \/>\ndown the general proposition that any appointment made in violation of the said<br \/>\nG.O, should be followed by regularisation.  But, in this case, the authorities<br \/>\nconcerned including the Collector at one point of time, interpreted the G.O, in<br \/>\nsuch a manner and found that even though the writ petitioner&#8217;s father was in<br \/>\nGovernment servicer at the time of death of her mother and subsequently, he<br \/>\nretired, yet they felt that the case of the writ petitioner could be considered<br \/>\nwithout applying the embargoes as contained in G.O.Ms.No.155 dated 16.07.1993<br \/>\nand that he has been in service for seventeen years and in such a case, I am of<br \/>\nthe considered opinion that it would be totally an act of injustice if the<br \/>\npetitioner is allowed to be terminated from service.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. Hence, in this view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed with<br \/>\nthe direction that he shall be retained in service as per service rules. No<br \/>\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n<p>rsb<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Secretary to Government,<br \/>\n  Rural Development Department,<br \/>\n  Fort St.George,<br \/>\n  Madras &#8211; 600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Director of Rural Development,<br \/>\n  Panagal Buildings,<br \/>\n  Saidapet,<br \/>\n  Madras &#8211; 600 015.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Collector,<br \/>\n  Virudhunagar,<br \/>\n  Kamarajar District.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Commissioner,<br \/>\n  Narikudi Panchayat Union,<br \/>\n  Narikudi,  Kamarajar District.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06\/12\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA W.P.No.5281 of 2007 (O.A.No.7408 of 1995) N.Pandikumar &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by The Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department, Fort [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-114852","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - 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\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-26T07:13:39+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-26T07:13:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1501,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\",\"name\":\"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-26T07:13:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - 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\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-26T07:13:39+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007","datePublished":"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-26T07:13:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007"},"wordCount":1501,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007","name":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-26T07:13:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-pandikumar-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-6-december-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"N.Pandikumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 December, 2007"}]},{"@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\/114852","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=114852"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114852\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=114852"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=114852"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=114852"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}