{"id":13795,"date":"2010-09-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-06-02T18:59:21","modified_gmt":"2014-06-02T13:29:21","slug":"d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 9677 of 2007(B)\n\n\n1. D.VIJAYAMMA, W\/O.P.KRISHNANKUTTY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :08\/09\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                               S. Siri Jagan, J.\n                =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n                        W.P(C) No. 9677 of 2007\n                =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n             Dated this, the 8th day of September, 2010.\n\n                              J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>      On 6.12.1978, the petitioner joined service of the 1st respondent<\/p>\n<p>as a Stenographer Gr. II. On 2.11.1979, the services of the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>were terminated.     The petitioner raised an industrial dispute against<\/p>\n<p>the termination of the petitioner&#8217;s service, which was adjudicated as<\/p>\n<p>I.D.No. 44\/80 by the Labour Court, Kollam         By Ext. P3 award dated<\/p>\n<p>22.10.1987, the Labour Court directed reinstatement of the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>with all service benefits except back wages. Pursuant thereto, the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner was reinstated in service by order dated 14-3-1985.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently,     by   Ext.    P4   order,   the    Government   directed<\/p>\n<p>regularization of the service of the petitioner with effect from 6-12-<\/p>\n<p>1978. Still, the petitioner was not given her service benefits for the<\/p>\n<p>period during which the petitioner was kept out of service.          The<\/p>\n<p>petitioner therefore challenged the orders passed in this regard<\/p>\n<p>refusing the benefits, by filing O.P.No. 10484\/1998, in which, by Ext.<\/p>\n<p>P7 judgment, the orders passed against the petitioner were quashed<\/p>\n<p>and the respondents were directed to extend all the service benefits to<\/p>\n<p>her except back wages as ordered by the Labour Court. Since it was<\/p>\n<p>not done, the petitioner filed Contempt of Court Case No. 172\/1999 in<\/p>\n<p>which, by Ext. P8 order, this Court closed the contempt case with the<\/p>\n<p>following direction:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;Heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.<br \/>\n      Sunitha Vinod, counsel for respondent.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             2. Grievance raised in this contempt case could be made<br \/>\n      known to the officer concerned so that the grievance could be<br \/>\n      taken note of by him and appropriate orders be passed in<br \/>\n      accordance with law. This judgment, however, will not prevent<br \/>\n      the petitioner from moving for contempt if the order is not<br \/>\n      effectively complied with. This contempt case is closed.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.C. No. 9677\/2007.                 -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had retired from service in<\/p>\n<p>2000. In respect of payment of retirement benefits to the petitioner,<\/p>\n<p>there arose a dispute. Ultimately, it was admitted that the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>is entitled to an additional amount of Rs. 35,364\/-. But, for paying<\/p>\n<p>the same, by Ext. P9 order, the 1st respondent insisted on                  the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner paying an amount of Rs. 95,249\/- alleged to be excess<\/p>\n<p>payment made to the petitioner. Along with the same, Ext. P10 dated<\/p>\n<p>16.11.2005 was also issued, wherein a calculation of amounts due to<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner has been given. But, in respect of the amount of Rs.<\/p>\n<p>95,249\/-, no details were given. In respect of the same, the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>filed Complaint no. 2180\/2005 before the Kerala Lok Ayukta, which<\/p>\n<p>was later on withdrawn by Ext. P11 order without prejudice to the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner&#8217;s right to move the appropriate forum for getting her<\/p>\n<p>grievances redressed. It is pursuant to the same the petitioner has<\/p>\n<p>filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;A.    To call for the entire records leading to the issuance of Ext.<br \/>\n      P9 and P10 orders and issue a writ of certiorari or any other<br \/>\n      appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature and quash the<br \/>\n      same.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      B.     Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,<br \/>\n      order or direction in the nature directing the 1st respondent to<br \/>\n      disburse all benefits legally due to the petitioner after proper<br \/>\n      fixation of pay.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner               submits that the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner would now confine her relief for a direction for payment of<\/p>\n<p>Rs. 35,364\/- without insisting on payment of               the amount of Rs.<\/p>\n<p>95,249\/-    demanded from the petitioner allegedly towards excess<\/p>\n<p>payment made to the petitioner, which she disputes. According to the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner, the period from 3-11-1979 to 18-3-1985, during which the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner had been kept out of service, had not been            computed for<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.C. No. 9677\/2007.              -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the purpose of fixation of pay and consequent retirement benefits and<\/p>\n<p>that is the reason for the demand now. According to the petitioner,<\/p>\n<p>Ext. P9 was issued 5 years after the retirement of the petitioner and<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner has not been made aware of any details regarding the<\/p>\n<p>demand made. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>is not liable to pay any amount to the 1st respondent as demanded.<\/p>\n<p>      4. A counter affidavit has been filed, wherein it is asserted that<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner is liable to pay the said amount of Rs. 95,249\/- towards<\/p>\n<p>excess pay drawn by her. Therefore, according to the 1st respondent,<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner can be paid the         amount of Rs. 35,364\/-,    if the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner remits the excess amount of Rs. 95,249\/- drawn by her<\/p>\n<p>during her service.     The 2nd respondent has also filed a counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavit supporting the 1st respondent&#8217;s case.\n<\/p>\n<p>      5. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.<\/p>\n<p>      6. I have searched all the documents before me and the counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavits to ascertain what is the amount of Rs. 95,249\/- demanded by<\/p>\n<p>the 1st respondent represents.        I couldn&#8217;t. Even in the counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavit, no details are forthcoming as to what exactly this amount<\/p>\n<p>represents. What has been stated in the counter affidavit is that a<\/p>\n<p>memo No. 1063\/98\/PM-B dated 27.2.1999 was issued to the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>in respect thereof. The 1st respondent has not chosen to produce a<\/p>\n<p>copy of that memo to substantiate the claim of the 1st respondent. It<\/p>\n<p>is for the 1st respondent to convince this Court that the petitioner is<\/p>\n<p>liable to pay any amount to the 1st respondent as a condition for<\/p>\n<p>disbursement of the balance retirement benefits due to the petitioner.<\/p>\n<p>I am of opinion that the 1st respondent has sadly failed to do so.<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a memo dated 27-2-1999 has been issued to the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>the said amount could have been recovered from the petitioner while<\/p>\n<p>she was still in service till 2000. No explanation is forthcoming as to<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.C. No. 9677\/2007.            -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>why it has not been done. In fact, they took six more years to issue<\/p>\n<p>Ext. P9 demand in that regard. In the above circumstances, I am not<\/p>\n<p>prepared to accept the contention of the 1st respondent that the said<\/p>\n<p>amount is due from the petitioner. In any event, after 5 years of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner&#8217;s retirement, the same cannot be        recovered from the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner cannot be compelled to pay the amount of Rs. 95,249\/-<\/p>\n<p>allegedly paid in excess to the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>      7. Accordingly, Exts.P9 and P10 are quashed. The respondents<\/p>\n<p>are directed to pay to the petitioner the amount of Rs. 35,364\/- with<\/p>\n<p>6% interest thereon from the date of the petitioner&#8217;s retirement. The<\/p>\n<p>same shall be paid within one month from today.\n<\/p>\n<p>      In view of the fact that the petitioner has been harassed<\/p>\n<p>throughout her service, I was inclined to award costs also.        But,<\/p>\n<p>exercising restraint, I refrain from doing so.     The writ petition is<\/p>\n<p>allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                         Sd\/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>Tds\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 9677 of 2007(B) 1. D.VIJAYAMMA, W\/O.P.KRISHNANKUTTY, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD &#8230; Respondent 2. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY For Petitioner :SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN For Respondent :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI The Hon&#8217;ble MR. [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13795","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - 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\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-02T13:29:21+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-02T13:29:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1131,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\",\"name\":\"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-02T13:29:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 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":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - 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\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-02T13:29:21+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-02T13:29:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010"},"wordCount":1131,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010","name":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development ... on 8 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-02T13:29:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-vijayamma-vs-kerala-livestock-development-on-8-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"D.Vijayamma vs Kerala Livestock Development &#8230; on 8 September, 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\/13795","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=13795"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13795\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13795"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13795"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13795"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}