{"id":141624,"date":"2009-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009"},"modified":"2018-02-07T19:07:14","modified_gmt":"2018-02-07T13:37:14","slug":"k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 06\/10\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM\n\nWrit Petition No.8431 of 2009\nand\nWrit Petition No.8434 of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)Nos.1 &amp; 1 of 2009\n\nK.Rajkumar\t  \t\t... Petitioner in W.P.No.8431 of 2009\nN.Karuppuchamy  \t\t... Petitioner in W.P.No.8434 of 2009\n\nVs\n\n1.The Secretary,\n  Ministry of Road Transport and\n  Highways, New Delhi.\n\n2.The Competent Authority and District Revenue Officer,\n  11\/A, Indira Nagar, Sennamanaickenpatti,\n  Dindigul.\n\n3.The Project Director,\n  National Highways Authority of India,\n  No.10, Kamadenu Nagar,\n  Venkamedu, Karur.\n\n4.The Tahsildar (L.A)\n  National Highways Unit I, Dindigul.\n\n5.The District Munsif,\n  District Munsif Court,\n  Vedasandur, Dindigul District....Respondents<\/pre>\n<p>Common Prayer<\/p>\n<p>Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,<br \/>\npraying for the issuance of  Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the<br \/>\nrecords relating to the impugned order of the second respondent in<br \/>\nNa.Ka.No.302\/2007\/A2, dated 09.06.2009 insofar as the land and dwelling house<br \/>\nbelonging to the petitioner and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent to withdraw and pay the compensation amount of Rs.15,487\/- and<br \/>\nRs.5,82,459\/- respectively pertaining to the petitioner deposited in the 5th<br \/>\nrespondent&#8217;s Court.\n<\/p>\n<pre>!For Petitioners       \t  ... Mr.R.R.Kannan\n(in both W.Ps)\n<\/pre>\n<p>^For Respondents 1,2 and 4&#8230; Mr.Pala.Ramasamy,<br \/>\n\t(In both W.Ps)        Special Government Pleader.\n<\/p>\n<pre>For 3rd Respondent     \t  ... Mr.R.Rajagopal\n\n:COMMON ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tSince the issue involved in both the writ petitions are identical and the<br \/>\nfacts and circumstances are also identical,  by consent they are taken up<br \/>\ntogether and disposed of by a common order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.The petitioners lands were subject matter of acquisition proceedings<br \/>\nunder the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and a notification under<br \/>\nSection 3-A(1) was published in the daily on 14.08.2006 and specified extent of<br \/>\nland were acquired for the purpose of widening the NH-7 between Bangalore-Salem-<br \/>\nMadurai scheme. Thereafter, notification under Section 3-G(3) of the Act was<br \/>\npublished in the daily on 02.06.2008 and during October 2008, the revenue<br \/>\nofficials have inspected the property and informed the petitioners that<br \/>\ncompensation would be paid for the land and building.  It is further submitted<br \/>\nthat the petitioners did not object to the measurement of the site since the<br \/>\nland is required for a public purpose.  Thereafter, dwelling house of the<br \/>\npetitioners was demolished without even payment of compensation and they have<br \/>\nalso formed their road on their patta land. Thereafter, the petitioners have<br \/>\napproached the second respondent on several occasions requesting for payment of<br \/>\ncompensation. However, no specific reply was given and the petitioners were<br \/>\nshocked to receive the order dated 09.06.2009, which is impugned in the writ<br \/>\npetitions stating that the compensation amount for the land and building has<br \/>\nbeen deposited to the credit of O.S.No.286 of 2008, on the file of the District<br \/>\nMunsif Court, Vedasandur by invoking their power  under Section 3-GH(4) of the<br \/>\nAct. It is aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners have filed the present<br \/>\nwrit petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.The correctness of the impugned order is assailed on the ground that the<br \/>\naction of the second respondent is unfair and unreasonable and the second<br \/>\nrespondent failed to note that the petitioner is not a party in the civil<br \/>\nlitigation pending before the District Munsif Court, Vedasandur and the second<br \/>\nrespondent ought not to have deposited the award amount pertaining to the<br \/>\npetitioners to the credit of the suit. It is further stated that the petitioners<br \/>\nhave not been served with a copy of the award which has prevented them from<br \/>\nknowing in what manner the award came to be passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.Mr.R.Rajagopal, learned counsel for the third respondent would contend<br \/>\nthat it is always open to the petitioners to file an application before the<br \/>\nCivil court seeking for withdrawal of the said amount and the petitioners cannot<br \/>\napproach this Court by filing the present writ petitions and state that the writ<br \/>\npetitions are liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.Heard Mr.R.R.Kannan, learned counsel for the petitioners,<br \/>\nMr.R.Rajagopal, learned counsel for the third respondent and Mr.Pala.Ramasamy,<br \/>\nlearned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1, 2 and 4 and perused<br \/>\nthe materials available on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.The Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/663505\/\">Special Land Acquisition Officer, U.K.<br \/>\nProject  v. Mahaboob and<\/a> another reported in (2009) 4 MLJ 137 (SC), while<br \/>\nconsidering the plight of the persons, who are affected by the land acquisition<br \/>\nproceedings held that unless the process of acquisition gives land owner a<br \/>\nreasonable compensation either at the time of or immediately after the<br \/>\ndispossession, the compensation will be a mirage for most land losers.  The<br \/>\nintention is that the land loser will immediately be able to draw compensation<br \/>\nand purchase some other suitable land or make appropriate arrangements for land<br \/>\nowner&#8217;s livelihood.  But in practice, the Collectors (LAOs) seldom make<br \/>\nreasonable offers.  They tend to err on the &#8216;safer&#8217; side and invariably assess<br \/>\nvery low compensation.  Such meagre awards force the land loser to seek<br \/>\nreference to civil Court for increase in compensation in regard to almost every<br \/>\naward made by the LAO.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.In the instant case, it is seen that a reference has been made to the<br \/>\npending civil litigation in O.S.No.286 of 2008 on the file of the District<br \/>\nMunsif Court, Vedasandur.  The plaintiff in the suit is one Mr.K.Muthusamy,<br \/>\nS\/o.Kasiappa Gounder and the defendants are Karuppasamy, S\/o.Ramsamy Gounder,<br \/>\nKalimuthu, S\/o.Karuppasamy, Thangaraj, S\/o.Karuppasamy. The same parties are<br \/>\nalso petitioners and respondents in the I.A filed in the suit.  The petitioner<br \/>\nin W.P.No.8431 of 2009, is K.Rajkumar, S\/o.N.Karuppuchamy and the petitioner in<br \/>\nW.P.No.8434 of 2009 is N.Karuppuchamy, S\/o.Nachiappan. Therefore, it is<br \/>\nabundantly clear that the petitioner in both the writ petitions are not<br \/>\ndefendants in the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.Bearing the decisions of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in mind, if the facts<br \/>\nof the present case are analysed which is also one such instance where the<br \/>\nacquiring body has not considered the plight of a person who has affected by<br \/>\nsuch acquisition.  In the instant case, it is submitted that the property in<br \/>\nquestion was a dwelling house which was demolished. Therefore, it is all the<br \/>\nmore necessary for the authorities functioning under the National Highways Act<br \/>\nto exercise their statutory powers in a judicious manner so that the person who<br \/>\nhas been divested of his interest in the land should not be made to suffer for<br \/>\nnon payment of compensation. Therefore, I am of the view that this is a fit case<br \/>\nwhere appropriate direction has to be issued to enable the petitioners to<br \/>\nreceive the compensation amount payable for the land and building which have<br \/>\nbeen subject matter of acquisition proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.It is to be noted that Karuppuchamy, S\/o.Ramasamy Gounder is the first<br \/>\ndefendant in the suit and by the very same impugned order, the said first<br \/>\ndefendant has been allowed to draw a portion of the compensation amount to the<br \/>\ntune of Rs.4,93,778\/-. Therefore, the second respondent has himself permitted a<br \/>\nparty to the civil proceedings to withdraw a portion of the compensation amount.<br \/>\nHence, there cannot be any impediment for a person who is not a party to the<br \/>\nproceedings to receive the entire compensation for the property which was<br \/>\nacquired from him.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.In view of the above reasons, the impugned order is set aside insofar<br \/>\nas it relates to the petitioners and the second respondent is directed to<br \/>\ninitiate appropriate action for the purpose of payment of compensation from the<br \/>\nproperty acquired from the petitioners by filing appropriate application before<br \/>\nthe District Munsif Court, Vedasandur in O.S.No.286 of 2008 and ensure that the<br \/>\ncompensation is paid to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the<br \/>\ndate of receipt of a copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently,<br \/>\nM.P.(MD)Nos.1 of 2009 are closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>sms<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Secretary,<br \/>\n  Ministry of Road Transport and<br \/>\n  Highways,<br \/>\n  New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Competent Authority and<br \/>\n  District Revenue Officer,<br \/>\n  11\/A, Indira Nagar,<br \/>\n  Sennamanaickenpatti,<br \/>\n  Dindigul.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Project Director,<br \/>\n  National Highways Authority of India,<br \/>\n  No.10, Kamadenu Nagar,<br \/>\n  Venkamedu,<br \/>\n  Karur.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Tahsildar (L.A)<br \/>\n  National Highways Unit I,<br \/>\n  Dindigul.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The District Munsif,<br \/>\n  District Munsif Court,<br \/>\n  Vedasandur,<br \/>\n  Dindigul District.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06\/10\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM Writ Petition No.8431 of 2009 and Writ Petition No.8434 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 &amp; 1 of 2009 K.Rajkumar &#8230; Petitioner in W.P.No.8431 of 2009 N.Karuppuchamy &#8230; Petitioner in W.P.No.8434 [&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-141624","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - 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\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1256,\"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\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\",\"name\":\"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - 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\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009"},"wordCount":1256,"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\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009","name":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-07T13:37:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-rajkumar-vs-the-secretary-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.Rajkumar vs The Secretary on 6 October, 2009"}]},{"@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\/141624","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=141624"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141624\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141624"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141624"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141624"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}