{"id":142551,"date":"2010-08-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010"},"modified":"2015-03-15T11:57:01","modified_gmt":"2015-03-15T06:27:01","slug":"mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 21982 of 2010(W)\n\n\n1. MR.JOSEPH MASTER, S\/O.ALEX, AGED 61,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KERALA STATE DELIMITATION COMMISSION\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,\n\n3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR\n\n4. VALLATHOLE NAGAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n Dated :17\/08\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                      T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.\n                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                     W.P.(C) No.21982 of 2010-W\n                   - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n              Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010.\n\n                                 JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner is aggrieved by the delimitation of wards of Vallathole<\/p>\n
Nagar Grama Panchayat. So many grounds have been raised in the writ<\/p>\n
petition with regard to the alleged illegality in the delimitation of wards.<\/p>\n
Exts.P3 and P4 are the proposals for delimitation and the notice issued by<\/p>\n
the District Collector. Certain complaints pointing out the defects in Ext.P4<\/p>\n
proposal, are detailed in para 4 of the writ petition. Ext.P5 is the further<\/p>\n
complaint given by the petitioner and Ext.P6 is the complaint given to the<\/p>\n
enquiry officer. A further complaint was given to the first respondent on<\/p>\n
19.3.2010 also. It is pointed out that while the Commission conducts<\/p>\n
enquiry\/inspection of evidence, it is mandatory as per Ext.P2 that the<\/p>\n
District Collector concerned must be present, whereas during the enquiry on<\/p>\n
19.3.2010, neither respondent No.3 nor the enquiry officer was present.<\/p>\n
      2.   The Delimitation Commission has filed a detailed statement and<\/p>\n
an additional statement. In the detailed statement, a preliminary objection<\/p>\n
has been raised relying upon the bar of judicial review provided under<\/p>\n
Article 243-O(a) of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
       3. Shri K. Jayakumar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
submitted that there is no bar in considering whether the process of<\/p>\n
delimitation is defective and in violation of the principles of natural justice.<\/p>\n
It is pointed out that the decisions of the Apex Court in N.P. Ponnuswami<\/p>\n
v. Returning Officer, Namakhal Constituency (AIR<\/a> 1952 SC 64),              and<\/p>\n
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Shri Raj Narain (AIR<\/a> 1975 SC 2299) will show<\/p>\n
that such an exercise by this Court with regard to the process of<\/p>\n
delimitation, is well accepted. On the issue of the validity of the process<\/p>\n
undertaken by the Commission, this Court can have a review and the same<\/p>\n
is not excluded. If at all any bar can be there, the same can only be on the<\/p>\n
final delimitation order. Reliance is placed on certain other decisions of the<\/p>\n
Apex Court also.\n<\/p>\n
       4.    In the preliminary objections, it is pointed out that in the light<\/p>\n
of Article 243-O (a) of the Constitution of India, there is a bar for<\/p>\n
interference by courts in respect of delimitation of constituencies.    Article<\/p>\n
243-O (a) states as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
             Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution–<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                    “the validity of any law relating to the delimitation<\/p>\n
             of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such<\/p>\n
             constituencies made or purporting to be made under<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
             Article 243K, shall not be called in question in any<\/p>\n
             court.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       5.    Section 10 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act provides detailed<\/p>\n
provisions for the delimitation of constituencies of Panchayats. We are<\/p>\n
concerned with Section 10(3) and 10(3A) which are extracted below:-<\/p>\n
       “S.10(3)    An order made by the State Election Commission<\/p>\n
             or the Officer authorised by it or the Delimitation<\/p>\n
             Commission shall not be called in question in any court<\/p>\n
             of law.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       S.10(3A)    Every     order    issued   by    the   Delimitation\n\n             Commission      with  regard    to  the   delimitation   of\n\n<\/pre>\n
             constituencies under this Section shall be published in<\/p>\n
             the Gazette and it shall have the force of law.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Going by Section 10(3A), once the delimitation order is published in the<\/p>\n
Gazette, it shall have the force of law and, therefore, the learned Standing<\/p>\n
Counsel for the Delimitation Commission submitted that the same will<\/p>\n
attract the bar under Article 243-O (a) of the Constitution of India. Reliance<\/p>\n
is placed on various decisions of the Apex Court and this Court.<\/p>\n
       6.    The issue is no longer res integra in the light of       various<\/p>\n
decisions of the Apex Court and this Court viz., Meghraj Kothari v.<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
Delimitation Commission and others [AIR 1967 SC 669], Chief<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer v. Sunny Joseph<\/a> [2005 (4) KLT 599], Satyan V.V v.<\/p>\n
Election Commission of India and others<\/a> [(2008) 4 KHC 245] wherein it<\/p>\n
was held that Article 329 is a bar for judicial review over the orders passed<\/p>\n
by the Delimitation Commission. In regard to the delimitation of wards of<\/p>\n
Panchayats also, the issue is governed by the decision in State of U.P v.<\/p>\n
Pradhan Singh Kshettra Samiti<\/a> [1995 (Supp.) (2) SCC 305] wherein at<\/p>\n
paragraph (45), the bar under Article 243-O (a) was considered and it was<\/p>\n
held that “if we read Article 243-C, 243-K and 243-O in the place of Article<\/p>\n
327 and Section 2(kk), 11-F and 12-BB of the Act in place of Sections 8<\/p>\n
and 9 of the Delimitation Act, 1950, it will be obvious that neither the<\/p>\n
delimitation of the Panchayat area nor the constituencies in the said areas<\/p>\n
and allotment of seats to the constituencies could have been challenged nor<\/p>\n
the court could have entertained such challenge except on the ground that<\/p>\n
before the delimitation, no objection were invited and no hearing was<\/p>\n
given”.\n<\/p>\n
      7.     Recently, in     Chirayinkeezhu A.Babu v. Delimitation<\/p>\n
Commission and others<\/a> [2010 (1) KHC 953] the same aspect was<\/p>\n
considered by me and it was held in paragraph (27) that “Article 329(a)<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
contains an absolute bar for this Court to consider the challenge against the<\/p>\n
order under the Delimitation Act, which is well settled by a decision of the<\/p>\n
Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Meghraj Kothari’s case [AIR<\/p>\n
1967 SC 669]”.\n<\/p>\n
      8.     In fact, in Association of Residents of MHOW (ROM) and<\/p>\n
another v. Delimitation Commission of India and others [(2009) 5 SCC<\/p>\n
404] also the above legal position has been reiterated.<\/p>\n
      9.     Another decision to be noticed is the decision of a Division<\/p>\n
Bench of this Court in Kunhabdulla v. State of Kerala<\/a> [2000 (3) KLT<\/p>\n
45]. The legal position was examined by the Bench in the light of the<\/p>\n
unamended provision of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, namely S.10A itself.<\/p>\n
The challenge was against the validity of Section 10A.           Section 10A<\/p>\n
conferred power of review on the Election Commission on an order passed<\/p>\n
under Section 10, by the authorised officer delimiting the wards. Therein,<\/p>\n
while examining the said question, this Court noticed that the provisions<\/p>\n
enable the District Collector to delimit the constituencies and Section 10A<\/p>\n
of the Panchayat Raj Act confers the power of review on the Election<\/p>\n
Commission. While considering these aspects, it was held in paragraph (5)<\/p>\n
that “Article 243-O(a) which bars the jurisdiction of any court to consider<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                         6<\/span><\/p>\n
the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of the constituencies or<\/p>\n
the allotment of seats to such constituencies will not get attracted where<\/p>\n
sweeping changes are made by the Election Commission to the delimitation<\/p>\n
order duly passed and published by the District Collector after hearing<\/p>\n
objections etc., under the guise of the power of review conferred on him<\/p>\n
under Section 10A of the Act when the whole election process is yet to<\/p>\n
begin and there is ample time left to undo the harm done by the former. In<\/p>\n
such a situation, this Court can exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the<\/p>\n
Constitution at least for the limited purpose of testing the constitutional<\/p>\n
validity of the provision (S.10A) under which the Election Commission has<\/p>\n
passed the impugned orders varying the original order of the District<\/p>\n
Collector without going into the merits of the order itself.” Apart from the<\/p>\n
same, this Court distinguished the Meghraj Kothari’s case [AIR 1967 SC<\/p>\n
669] on the view that there is no provision in S.10A that the order passed<\/p>\n
under Section 10A by the Election Commission will have the force of law<\/p>\n
when published in the Gazette and, therefore, it will not be law for the<\/p>\n
purpose of Article 243-O. Accordingly, it was held in paragraph (7) that bar<\/p>\n
under Article 243-O(a) will not be applicable.        But in the light of the<\/p>\n
Judgments of the Apex Court noticed above       and that  of then    Division<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                        7<\/span><\/p>\n
Benches referred to above, the dictum laid in Kunhabdulla’s case [2000 (3)<\/p>\n
KLT 45] cannot be applied on all fours to the situation pointed out herein.<\/p>\n
Now Section 10(3A) has been added making it clear that on publication in<\/p>\n
the Gazette the order of delimitation will have the force of law. Once the<\/p>\n
notification is published in the Gazette, then going by the decision of the<\/p>\n
Apex Court, the bar applies, as it will be the law for the purpose of Article<\/p>\n
243-O(a) and the non-obstante clause therein is important and becomes<\/p>\n
operative. Therefore, the said decision is clearly distinguishable on the<\/p>\n
facts of the said cases and the legal position laid down by the various<\/p>\n
decisions of the Apex Court.\n<\/p>\n
      10.    In the light of the above, the preliminary objections raised by<\/p>\n
the Commission is sustainable.\n<\/p>\n
      11.    Of course, the question is whether the Commission has<\/p>\n
undertaken the process of delimitation in terms of the statutory mandate.<\/p>\n
Herein, going by the details available, the draft proposal was published<\/p>\n
inviting objections as per Ext.P3 and parties had submitted various<\/p>\n
objections which were subjected to enquiry by the enquiry officer also.<\/p>\n
There was a hearing on the objections.      In that view of the matter, there<\/p>\n
cannot be any allegation of violation of the principles of natural justice as<\/p>\n
contended by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                        8<\/span><\/p>\n
      12. With regard to the merits of the contentions also, it is explained<\/p>\n
by the Delimitation Commission       and the 4th respondent that the total<\/p>\n
residential houses in the Panchayat as per the 2001 census is 23485. In the<\/p>\n
additional statement in para 6, a statement showing the number of<\/p>\n
residential buildings and the assessed population in each ward and the<\/p>\n
percentage of difference from the average population, has been reproduced.<\/p>\n
The average population is taken as       1468 and the average number of<\/p>\n
residential buildings is taken as 355. According to the Commission, the<\/p>\n
chart provided will show that the population and the number of residential<\/p>\n
buildings arranged in each ward is strictly adhering to the norms and<\/p>\n
guidelines issued by the Commission. It is therefore contended that the<\/p>\n
petitioner’s contention that there is huge difference in the number of<\/p>\n
residential buildings and assessed population in each ward, is without any<\/p>\n
basis. I find force in the above contention.\n<\/p>\n
      13. The allegation that the District Collector nor the enquiry officer<\/p>\n
were present on 19.3.2010, during the hearing is explained in para 8 of the<\/p>\n
additional statement. It is explained that the designated enquiry officer and<\/p>\n
the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat were present on 19.3.2010. Photo<\/p>\n
copy of the attendance sheet has been produced in support of the above<\/p>\n
plea. With regard to the absence of the District Collector, it is explained<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                          9<\/span><\/p>\n
that in view of various responsibilities conferred on the District Collector,<\/p>\n
he could not be present and the same will not vitiate the hearing. Therefore,<\/p>\n
it cannot be said that there is any illegality on this score.<\/p>\n
      14. It is evident from the statement that ten objections were received<\/p>\n
against the draft proposal and all the objections were considered. Five<\/p>\n
definite changes were directed by the Commission to the draft proposal.<\/p>\n
Evidently, this has been done only after considering the objections and<\/p>\n
hearing the parties.\n<\/p>\n
      15.    It cannot be said that every objections raised against the<\/p>\n
delimitation proposal should result in separate orders to be passed by the<\/p>\n
Commission. Such an exercise is not contemplated in Section 10(2) of the<\/p>\n
Kerala Panchayat Raj Act also. With regard to Ext.P8 complaint, it is<\/p>\n
explained that the same was submitted on 13.5.2010, after the last date<\/p>\n
fixed for submitting objections which was on 11.1.2010. Evidently, the<\/p>\n
Commission could not have considered the said objection which was<\/p>\n
submitted beyond the period prescribed by the preliminary notification.<\/p>\n
Every one of the objections need not result in a fresh proposal, going by the<\/p>\n
principles stated by the Apex Court in Association of Residents of MHOW<\/p>\n
(ROM)’s case {(2009) 5 SCC 404}.\n<\/p>\n
      16. The Commission is expected to finalise the delimitation process<\/p>\n
wpc 21982\/2010                          10<\/span><\/p>\n
after considering various aspects. But at the same time, the parties cannot<\/p>\n
insist that every one of the objections should be separately considered and<\/p>\n
separate orders will have to be passed.\n<\/p>\n
        I find no infirmity in the process adopted by the Commission. The<\/p>\n
writ petition is dismissed for all the above reasons. No costs.<\/p>\n
                                       (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)<\/p>\n
kav\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 21982 of 2010(W) 1. MR.JOSEPH MASTER, S\/O.ALEX, AGED 61, … Petitioner Vs 1. KERALA STATE DELIMITATION COMMISSION … Respondent 2. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR 4. VALLATHOLE NAGAR […]<\/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-142551","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-15T06:27:01+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-15T06:27:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1958,\"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\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-15T06:27:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 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":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-15T06:27:01+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-15T06:27:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010"},"wordCount":1958,"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\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010","name":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation ... on 17 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-15T06:27:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-joseph-master-vs-kerala-state-delimitation-on-17-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr.Joseph Master vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 17 August, 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\/142551","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=142551"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142551\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142551"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=142551"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=142551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}