{"id":159369,"date":"2009-10-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009"},"modified":"2015-06-29T09:40:57","modified_gmt":"2015-06-29T04:10:57","slug":"m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS \n\nDATE : 21.10.2009\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY\n\nW.P. NO.5665 OF 2007\nAND\nW.V.M.P. NO. 1 OF 2007\n\nM.Shyamala Ammal\t\t\t\t\t.. Petitioner\n\n- Vs -\n\n1. The Secretary (FPD)\n   Ministry of Consumer Affairs\n   Food &amp; Public Distribution\n   Government of India\n   Krishi Bhavan\n   New Delhi 110 001.\n\n2. The State of Tamil Nadu\n   rep. By Secretary to Govt.\n   Dept. of Agriculture\n   Fort St. George\n   Chennai.\n\n3. The Director of Sugar and\n   Cane Commissioner of Tamil Nadu\n   Chennai 600 035.\n\n4. The Collector\n   Cuddalore District\n   Cuddalore.\n\n5. EID Parry (I) Ltd.\n   Nellikuppam by its\n   General Manager\n   Nellikuppam\n   Panruti Taluk\n   Cuddalore District.\n\n6. EID Parry Sugar Cane\n   Suppliers Association\n   rep. By its President\n   M.Arunachalam\n   Reddiyar Street, Pagandai Post\n   Keelkavarapattu (via)\n   Nellikuppam.\t\t\t\t\t.. Respondents\n   (R-6 impleaded vide order of\n   Court dt. 21.10.09 in W.V.M.P.\n   No.2 of 2007)\n\tWrit Petition filed for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent to make payment to all its registered ryots at the statutory minimum rate fixed for 2003-2004 (Rs.730\/= per tonne for 8.5% return with proportionate rate based on the percentage of return), consequently directing respondents 1 to 4 to ensure that 5th respondent pays the difference between the amount already paid and statutory minimum price fixed for 2003-2004 with interest at 15% per annum from 1.10.2003 and to pay cane price every year within 14 days of cutting as stated therein.\n\t\tFor Petitioner \t: Mr. R.Gururaj\n\n\t\tFor Respondents\t: Mr. C.Natarajan, SC, for \n\t\t\t\t\t\t  Mr. N.Inbarajan for R-5\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  Ms. C.Uma for \n\t\t\t\t\t\t  Ms. Gladys Daniel for R-6\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J.)<br \/>\nThe writ petition was preferred by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent to make payments to all its registered cane growers at the statutory minimum rate for the year 2003-2004, i.e., Rs.730\/MT for 8.5% return with proportionate rate based on the percentage of return.  Further prayer was made to direct the respondent to pay interest @ 15% p.a. for the period from October, 2003.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. The writ petition was preferred in the year 2007.  The matter relates to payment of statutory minimum price to the cane growers, who supply sugarcane to the 5th respondent company. The 5th respondent company has filed a counter affidavit and has taken plea that it has already acted in the interest of the cane growers.  It is stated that the Government fixed the statutory price of sugarcane for the year 2003-04 at Rs.730\/MT with 8.5% return.  That was challenged before this Court in W.P. No.1569\/04.  In the said case, by interim order dated 3rd Feb., 2004, this Court directed to pay Rs.655\/MT with 8.5% recovery.  The said case is still pending.  But, in the meantime, the 5th respondent has paid the amount in favour of the cane growers, who supplied sugarcane for the period 2003-04 and subsequent period.  For the period 2003-04, a sum of Rs.869\/MT has been paid by the 5th respondent, i.e., on the basis of the calculation of Rs.735\/MT with 10.10% return.  The following are the date with regard to price fixed and payment made under the control order :-\n<\/p>\n<p>Sl. No.<br \/>\nSugar Year<br \/>\nClause 3\/A<br \/>\nPrice (Rs.)<br \/>\nNotfn. No. &amp; Date<br \/>\nRate\/mt applicable to Respon<br \/>\n(Rs.)<br \/>\n       SAP<\/p>\n<p>Ref.\n<\/p>\n<p>Per\/Mt<br \/>\nApplicable to Respon<br \/>\n(Rs.)<br \/>\n5A Price announced by C.O. Sugars<br \/>\n(Rs.)<br \/>\nNotfn. No. &amp; Date<br \/>\nRate\/mt applicable to Respon<br \/>\n(Rs.)<br \/>\nActual price paid by the respond<br \/>\n(Rs.)<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">1<\/span><br \/>\n01-02<br \/>\n620.50<br \/>\nG.S.R. 867(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 27.11.2001<br \/>\n693.50<br \/>\nNil<\/p>\n<p>0.00<br \/>\nRc. No.12264\/Cane 1\/2005-9 dt. 2.5.2006<br \/>\n693.5<br \/>\n765.00<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">2<\/span><br \/>\n02-03<br \/>\n645.00<br \/>\nG.S.R. 821(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 12.12.2002<br \/>\n683.00<br \/>\nNil<\/p>\n<p>0.00<br \/>\nRc. No.12264\/Cane 1\/2005-9 dt. 2.5.2006<br \/>\n683.00<br \/>\n735.00<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">3<\/span><br \/>\n03-04<br \/>\n730.00<br \/>\nG.S.R. 44(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 14.01.2004<br \/>\n866.00<br \/>\nNil<\/p>\n<p>866.00<br \/>\n869.00<\/p>\n<p>03-04<br \/>\n655.00<br \/>\nAs per court order<br \/>\n778.30<br \/>\nNil<\/p>\n<p>9.80<br \/>\nRc. No.12264\/Cane 1\/2005-9 dt. 2.5.2006<br \/>\n788.10<br \/>\n869.00<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">4<\/span><br \/>\n04-05<br \/>\n745.00<br \/>\nG.S.R. 92(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 24.02.2005<br \/>\n806.60<br \/>\nNil<\/p>\n<p>Not finalised<\/p>\n<p>915.00<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">5<\/span><br \/>\n05-06<br \/>\n795.00<br \/>\nG.S.R.1727(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 22.03.2006<br \/>\n795.00<br \/>\nR.C. No.31254\/Cane-1\/2005 Dt.07\/02\/06<br \/>\n1014.00<br \/>\nNot finalised<\/p>\n<p>1015.00<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">6<\/span><br \/>\n06-07<br \/>\n802.50<br \/>\nG.S.R. 766(E) ESS.COMM.\/Sugarcane 22.12.2006<br \/>\n802.50<br \/>\nR.C. No.25646\/Cane-1\/06 Dt 12\/12\/06<br \/>\n1025.00<br \/>\nNot finalised<\/p>\n<p>1026.00<\/p>\n<p>3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while accepted that amount for the period 2003-04 has already been paid at the rate prescribed by the State, it was submitted that the amount for the period October, 2003, was paid on the basis of old rate fixed and difference on the basis of the new rate was paid subsequently.  It is for the said reason he requested the court to direct the 5th respondent to pay interest on the difference amount paid for the month of October, 2003.<br \/>\nAccording to learned counsel for the 5th respondent, the rate of cane is fixed by the Central Government for the period upto September of the calendar year.  The rate for the period October onwards is fixed sometime in October.  In the year 2003, no rate was fixed for the month of October, 2003, which was subsequently fixed by the Central Government sometime in January, 2004.  In absence of such notification by the Central Government, payment for the month of October, 2003, was made on the basis of the old rate, i.e., Rs.735\/= per MT with 10.10% return.  Subsequently, when the new rate was prescribed in January, 2004, the difference amount was paid, which comes around Rs.53\/= per MT.  He referred to an additional counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent wherein the following statement has been made :-<br \/>\n(2) This respondent agrees to settle the statutory interest for the delay in settlement of differential sum of Rs.53\/= per MT for cane purchases of October, 2003, for the period between the due date in October, 2003 and the date of payment out, within the period as directed by this Hon&#8217;ble Court.<\/p>\n<p>4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.  From the stand taken by the 5th respondent it will be clear that there was no laches on the part of the 5th respondent, who settled the dues on the basis of the Central Government&#8217;s prescription.  For October, 2003, the 5th respondent has given a valid explanation for not paying the difference amount in October, 2003, which was paid subsequently in the beginning of 2004.  In this background, this Court is not inclined to pass any order against the 5th respondent.  However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and the undertaking given by the 5th respondent to settle the statutory interest for the delay in settlement of differential sum of Rs.53\/= per MT for the cane purchases in the month of October, 2003, for the period between the due date in October 2003 and the date of payment out, we direct the 5th respondent to pay such interest within a period of one month.<br \/>\nThe writ petition stands disposed of.  Consequently, W.V.M.P. No.1 of 2007 is closed.  But there shall be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<pre>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t        (S.J.M.J.)         (M.D.J.)\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t         21.10.2009\nIndex     : Yes\/No\nInternet : Yes\/No\nGLN\n\nTo\n1. The Secretary (FPD)\n   Ministry of Consumer Affairs\n   Food &amp; Public Distribution\n   Government of India\n   Krishi Bhavan\n   New Delhi 110 001.\n\n2. The Secretary to Government\n   Government of Tamil Nadu\n   Dept. of Agriculture\n   Fort St. George\n   Chennai.\n\n3. The Director of Sugar and\n   Cane Commissioner of Tamil Nadu\n   Chennai 600 035.\n\n4. The Collector\n   Cuddalore District\n   Cuddalore.\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t                   \t                S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t                      AND\n\t\t                                    \t\t          M.DURAISWAMY, J.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tGLN\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       \n\t\t\t\t\t\t              W.P. NO. 5665 OF 2007\n\n\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t   21.10.2009<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE : 21.10.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P. NO.5665 OF 2007 AND W.V.M.P. NO. 1 OF 2007 M.Shyamala Ammal .. Petitioner &#8211; Vs &#8211; 1. The [&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-159369","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>M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 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\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-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=\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-29T04:10:57+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\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-29T04:10:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":878,\"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\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\",\"name\":\"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-29T04:10:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 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":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 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\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-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":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-29T04:10:57+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\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-29T04:10:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009"},"wordCount":878,"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\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009","name":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-29T04:10:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-shyamala-ammal-vs-the-secretary-fpd-on-21-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M.Shyamala Ammal vs The Secretary (Fpd) on 21 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\/159369","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=159369"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159369\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159369"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159369"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159369"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}