{"id":149817,"date":"2007-11-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007"},"modified":"2014-10-26T14:24:55","modified_gmt":"2014-10-26T08:54:55","slug":"p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 15\/11\/2007\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR\n\n\nW.P(MD)No.8297 of 2006\nand\nM.P(MD)No.1 of 2006\nW.P(MD)No.727 of 2007 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2007\nW.P(MD)No.8297 of 2006\n\n\nP. Raajendran\t\t\t...\t\tPetitioner\n\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n1.\tThe District Collector,\n\tSivagangai District,\n\tSivagangai.\n\n2.\tAdditional Director of Panchayat,\n\tSivagangai.\n\n3.\tBlock Development Officer (VP),\n\tS.Pudur Panchayat Union Office,\n\tSivagangai District.\n\n4.\tThe President,\n\tOrathupatty Village,\n\tSivagangai District.\t...\t\tRespondents\n\n\nPRAYER\n\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue\na Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the third\nrespondent's proceeding Na.Ka.B1\/769\/2003 dated 4.3.2003, quash the same and\nconsequently direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner as part time\nPanchayat Clerk.\n\n\n!A.L. Vadivel\t\t\t...\t\tPetitioner\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n$1.\tThe State of Tamil Nadu,\n\trep.by Secretary,\n\tRural Development &amp; Local Administration,\n\tFort St.George,\n\tChennai - 600 009.\n\n2.\tThe District Collector,\n\tSivagantai District,\n\tSivagangai.\n\n3.\tThe Assistant Director of Panchayats,\n\t(Rural Development),\n\tSivagangai.\n\n4.\tBlock Development Officer (VP),\n\tS.Pudur Panchayat Union Office,\n\tSivagangai District.\n\n5.\tThe President,\n\tOorathupatti Village,\n\tS.Pudur Union,\n\tSivagangai District.\n\n6.\tP. Raajendran,\n\tOrathupatty Village,\n\tS.Pudur Union,\n\tSivagangai District.\t...\t\tRespondents\n\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying\nthis Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records\nrelating to the impugned order dated 27.12.2006 suspending the petitioner from\nservice and quash the same and consequently direct the 5th respondent to permit\nthe petitioner to continue in service as Clerk in S.Pudur Union, Orathupatti\nPanchayat, Sivagangai as per service register with effect from 1.9.2006.\n\n\n!For Petitioner\tin W.P.8297\/2006\t...\tMr.K.Mahendran\n\n\n^For Petitioner in W.P.727\/2007 \t...\tMr.Madhavagovindan\n\n\nFor RR.1 to 4 in W.P.8297\/2006 \t\t...\tMrs.V.Chellammal,\n&amp; RR.1 to 5 in W.P.727\/2007\t\t\tSpecial Govt. Pleader\n\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>W.P.No.8297 of 2006<\/p>\n<p>\tW.P.No.8297 of 2006 is filed to quash the order passed by the third<br \/>\nrespondent dated 4.3.2003 placing the petitioner under suspension and to direct<br \/>\nthe fourth respondent to reinstate the petitioner as Part-time Panchayat Clerk.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.\tThe case of the petitioner is that on the resolution of Orathupatty<br \/>\nVillage Panchayat, petitioner was appointed as Part-time Panchayat Assistant<br \/>\nfrom 1.11.1997 and his salary was fixed at a sum of Rs.350\/- per month.  The<br \/>\nfourth respondent sent a report to the third respondent on 4.3.2003 and stated<br \/>\nthat the petitioner was not doing any work and requested the third respondent to<br \/>\nsuspend the petitioner so that the third respondent will be in a position to<br \/>\nappoint a person, who is close relative of the President.   The third respondent<br \/>\nby order dated 4.3.2003, suspended the petitioner and directed one Alagan<br \/>\nPoosari from Melavanniruppu Village Panchayat to look after the work assigned to<br \/>\nthe petitioner.  On 10.11.2003, petitioner submitted a report to the Block<br \/>\nDevelopment Officer, S.Pudur Panchayat Union and requested the Block Development<br \/>\nOfficer to reinstate him and pay the salary for the suspension period, however<br \/>\nno action was taken by the Block Development Officer.  On 21.3.2003 a charge<br \/>\nmemo was issued containing four charges, which reads as follows:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;A.\tThat the petitioner has not attended the office and failed to<br \/>\ndischarge his duty in collecting the tax and remitted the same to the<br \/>\nGovernment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tB.\tThat the petitioner has failed to appear before the Executive<br \/>\nOfficer (Panchayat) and produce the documents for inspection and thereby<br \/>\ndisobeyed the order of the superior.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tC.\tThat after collecting the tax failed to remit the amount into the<br \/>\nPanchayat account and thereby misappropriated the amount.<br \/>\n\tD.\tThat after collecting the tax amount, petitioner failed to remit the<br \/>\namount into the correct account and thereby neglected the instruction given by<br \/>\nthe higher officials and also directed him to give an explanation within a<br \/>\nperiod of 7 days failing which they will decide to take further action as per<br \/>\nthe available documents.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>On 31.10.2003, petitioner submitted a representation to the 4th respondent<br \/>\nseeking payment of subsistence allowance.  In spite of the same, no subsistence<br \/>\nallowance is paid.  On 21.4.2004, petitioner submitted all the records and<br \/>\nremitted all the tax amount collected and requested for restoration in service.<br \/>\nPetitioner submitted his explanation for the above charges on 31.3.2003 and<br \/>\ndenied the same.  No enquiry was conducted in spite of repeated representations.<br \/>\nThe second respondent sent a reply to the petitioner on 4.10.2005 and stated<br \/>\nthat suspension or removal from service of a part time clerk of Village<br \/>\nPanchayat is vested with the President of the Village Panchayat and he has no<br \/>\njurisdiction.  On 21.4.2006, 4th respondent requested the petitioner to appear<br \/>\nbefore the Commissioner of Panchayat Union for enquiry and no order having been<br \/>\npassed, petitioner challenged the order of suspension dated 4.3.2003 in this<br \/>\nwrit petition by contending that the third respondent has no jurisdiction to<br \/>\nplace the petitioner under suspension and the disciplinary power is vested with<br \/>\nthe Executive authority, who is the President of the Village Panchayat under the<br \/>\nTamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.  Petitioner also stated that no subsistence<br \/>\nallowance was paid and no final order in the disciplinary proceeding is also<br \/>\npassed.  Therefore the petitioner contended that the prolonged suspension from<br \/>\n4.3.2003 is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.\tThe third respondent filed counter affidavit contending that the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent sent a report to the third respondent on 4.3.2003 stating that the<br \/>\npetitioner is not doing any work and requested the third respondent to suspend<br \/>\nthe petitioner.  It is also admitted in the counter affidavit that the third<br \/>\nrespondent suspended the petitioner and issued charge memo on 21.3.2003. It is<br \/>\nalso averred in the counter affidavit that no explanation for the charge memo<br \/>\ndated 21.3.2003 was submitted by the petitioner.  The Extension Officer<br \/>\n(Panchayat) enquired the complaint given by the 4th respondent and recommended<br \/>\nfor temporary suspension of the petitioner on 4.3.2003 and therefore the third<br \/>\nrespondent suspended the petitioner.  It is also stated in the counter affidavit<br \/>\nthat the third respondent removed the petitioner from service by resolution<br \/>\ndated 1.5.2003 and the removal order dated 19.6.2003 was served on the<br \/>\npetitioner on the same day itself, for which the petitioner gave his<br \/>\nacknowledgment.  On the above pleadings the third respondent prayed for<br \/>\ndismissal of the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.\tHeard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as<br \/>\nthe learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.\tIn the light of the pleading, particularly with regard to the<br \/>\naverments made in the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent stating<br \/>\nthat the petitioner was removed from service by order dated 19.6.2003, which was<br \/>\nsaid to be acknowledged by the petitioner on the same day 19.6.2003, I directed<br \/>\nthe Government Pleader to produce the original file, pursuant to which the<br \/>\noriginal file was produced before me.  From the file it could be seen that the<br \/>\norder passed by the 4th respondent on 19.6.2003 which was acknowledged by the<br \/>\npetitioner on the same day is not an order of dismissal and it is only an<br \/>\nintimation that charges will be framed against the petitioner and the petitioner<br \/>\nwill be dismissed from service.  In the file, no charge memo framed thereafter<br \/>\nor any dismissal order passed is available.  Further, from the impugned order in<br \/>\nW.P.No.727 of 2007 passed by the President of the Village Panchayat on<br \/>\n27.12.2006 it could be seen that the petitioner was restored to service and<br \/>\ntherefore there is no order of termination passed as averred in the counter<br \/>\naffidavit filed by the third respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.\tIn view of the statements contained in the counter affidavit at page<br \/>\nNo.4 reiterating the stand that the order dated 19.6.2003 is the removal order<br \/>\npassed against the petitioner, which was acknowledged by the petitioner, it is<br \/>\nclearly proved without any ambiguity that no order, other than the one stated<br \/>\nsupra is passed against the petitioner dismissing the petitioner from service.<br \/>\nThe learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no charge memo was issued<br \/>\nto the petitioner till date and the petitioner is not permitted to work due to<br \/>\nthe order of suspension, which is impugned in this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.\tThe order of suspension is dated 4.3.2003 and the same is also<br \/>\npassed by the third respondent.  Under the rules, disciplinary power against the<br \/>\nPanchayat staff is vested with the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat<br \/>\nand the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat is the President as per the<br \/>\nnotification issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.225 Rural Development (C1)<br \/>\nDepartment, dated 15.10.1996, which reads as follows:<br \/>\n&#8220;NOTIFICATION<br \/>\n\tIn exercise of the powers conferred by Section 83 of the Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nPanchayats Act, 1994 (Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1994), the Governor of Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nhereby appoints the President of Village Panchayat, as Executive Authority to<br \/>\nexercise the power and perform the functions of the Executive Authority of that<br \/>\nVillage Panchayat.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The impugned suspension order is passed by the third respondent, who is<br \/>\nadmittedly not the Executive Authority.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.\tSimilar issue arose before this Court in the decision reported in<br \/>\n2004 (2) Law Weekly 577 <a href=\"\/doc\/1375856\/\">(P.Adhikesavelu v. The District Collector, Thiruvallur<br \/>\nand others<\/a>) wherein it is held that under section 84 of the Panchayats Act, the<br \/>\nVillage Panchayat President is the competent authority to pass orders.  Section<br \/>\n84(b) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, clearly states that the Executive<br \/>\nAuthority shall have control over all the officers and servants of the Village<br \/>\nPanchayat.  The said control amply discloses the disciplinary power including<br \/>\nthe power of suspension, dismissal. Hence the impugned order passed by the third<br \/>\nrespondent is without jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.\tThe learned counsel for the respondents are unable to show any rule<br \/>\nempowering the Block Development Officer to pass the order of suspension.  Hence<br \/>\nthe impugned order of suspension passed by the third respondent is declared<br \/>\ninvalid.  However, it is open to the 4th respondent, who is the Executive<br \/>\nAuthority, to issue charge memo against the petitioner, if it is warranted, and<br \/>\ncomplete the disciplinary proceeding if initiated, within a period of three<br \/>\nmonths from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  Since the petitioner was<br \/>\nsuspended, who was a part-time employee, the payment of salary for the<br \/>\nsuspension period will depend upon the ultimate decision to be taken in the<br \/>\ndisciplinary proceeding, if any initiated, against the petitioner. If no<br \/>\ndisciplinary proceeding is initiated against the petitioner by the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent, the entire suspension period shall be treated as duty period without<br \/>\nbackwages.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tW.P.No.8297 of 2006 is allowed on the above terms.  No costs.  Connected<br \/>\nmiscellaneous petition is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>W.P.No.727 of 2007<\/p>\n<p>\t10.\tPrayer in this writ petition is to quash the order dated 27.12.2006<br \/>\nsuspending the petitioner herein from the service of the 5th respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.\tPetitioner was admittedly appointed in the vacancy caused due to<br \/>\nsuspension of the 6th respondent, who is the petitioner in W.P.No.8297 of 2006.<br \/>\nThe suspension order passed against the 6th respondent having been quashed on<br \/>\nthe ground of lack of jurisdiction and no order of termination having been<br \/>\npassed against the 6th respondent till date, the petitioner herein is not<br \/>\nentitled to contend that he should be permitted to work.  The 5th respondent has<br \/>\npassed an order on 27.12.2006 permitting the 6th respondent to rejoin duty on<br \/>\ncancellation of the suspension order and due to the said action, there is no<br \/>\nvacancy for the petitioner herein to continue in the post and therefore he was<br \/>\nrelieved from his duties.  The impugned order clearly states that the petitioner<br \/>\nAL.Vadivel, who is functioning as part-time clerk  of Orathupatty Village<br \/>\nPanchayat of S.Pudur Block of Panchayat Union of Sivagangai District, is ordered<br \/>\nto be suspended from the date when the 6th respondent viz., P.Rajendran re-join<br \/>\nduty.  The said order clearly discloses yet another fact that the said 6th<br \/>\nrespondent was not terminated from his service by the competent authority viz.,<br \/>\nthe Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat.  There is no error in the<br \/>\norder of the 5th respondent, as admittedly petitioner was appointed in the<br \/>\nvacancy arose due to the suspension of the 6th respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.\tThere is no merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed.<br \/>\nNo costs.  Connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>vr<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe Secretary,<br \/>\n\tRural Development &amp; Local Administration,<br \/>\n\tFort St.George, Chennai &#8211; 600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe District Collector, Sivagantai District,<br \/>\n\tSivagangai.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe Additional Director of Panchayat,<br \/>\n\tSivagangai.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe Assistant Director of Panchayats,<br \/>\n\t(Rural Development), Sivagangai.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe Block Development Officer (VP),<br \/>\n\tS.Pudur Panchayat Union Office, Sivagangai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThe President, Oorathupatti Village,<br \/>\n\tS.Pudur Union,\tSivagangai District.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15\/11\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.8297 of 2006 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2006 W.P(MD)No.727 of 2007 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2007 W.P(MD)No.8297 of 2006 P. Raajendran &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1. The District [&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-149817","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>P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 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\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-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=\"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-26T08:54:55+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\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-26T08:54:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1753,\"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\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\",\"name\":\"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-26T08:54:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 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":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 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\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-26T08:54:55+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\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-26T08:54:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007"},"wordCount":1753,"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\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007","name":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-26T08:54:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-raajendran-vs-the-district-collector-on-15-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P. Raajendran vs The District Collector on 15 November, 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\/149817","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=149817"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/149817\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=149817"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=149817"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=149817"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}