{"id":171821,"date":"2008-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008"},"modified":"2014-04-13T13:04:08","modified_gmt":"2014-04-13T07:34:08","slug":"paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADRUAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED:  25\/09\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.K.CHANDRU\n\nW.P.No. 4505 of 2007\nand\nW.M.P.Nos.2,3 &amp; 5 of 2008\n\n1.Paul Nadar\n2.P.Sudalaiandi Nadar\n3.Raja Perumal\n4.Maria Singam\n5.Muthu Ganesan\n6.Motchamani Jebamalai\n7.Saverial Backiyam\t\t\t ...\t  Petitioners\n\nVs\n\n1.The District Officer,\n  Thoothukudi.\n\n2.The Tahsildar,\n  Vilathikulam,\n  Thoothukudi District.\n\n3.The President,\n  Vembar South Panchayat,\n  Vembar Post,\n  Vilathikulam Taluk,\n  Thoothukudi District.\n\n4.Susaimani Nadar\n\n5.Antony Rajamichael\n\n6.Stephenraj\n\n7.John Britto\n\n8.Deva Arockiyam\n\n9.Antony Savrimuthu\n\n10.Sesuraja\t\t\t\n\n11.K.S.Rajagopal\t\t\t\t\n\n(11th respondent impleaded vide order\n dated 19.09.2008 made in\n M.P.No.4 of 2007)\t\t\t...\t  Respondents\n\nPRAYER\n\nWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for\nissuance of a Writ of Mandamus to call for the records and proceedings\npertaining to the list of beneficiaries of Vembar South Panchayat for\nalternative houses dated 08.06.2005 on the file of the second respondent and\nquash the same and further directing the respondents to hand over the houses\nconstructed in Thenmayilai Nagar, Vambar South Panchayat, Vembar Post,\nVilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District initially to the persons whose name are\nincluded in the list of the second respondent dated 16.05.2005 and approved by\nthe third respondent by its resolution dated 08.06.2005.\n\n!For Petitioner   ... Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai\n^For R.1 and R.2  ... Mr.R.Janakiramalu\n\t\t      Spl.Govt.Pleader\nFor R6&amp;R8&amp;R9      ... Mr.M.E.Ilango\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t *****\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe seven petitioners were victims of the Tsunami  that struck the coastal<br \/>\nareas of the Tamil Nadu in the year 2005.  They claimed to be the residents of<br \/>\nVambar South Panchayat in Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District. Equally so,<br \/>\nthe respondents 4 to 10 are also the residents of the same Panchayat and victims<br \/>\nof the same holocaust.  When a mass disaster took place in the coastal lines of<br \/>\nTamil Nadu, many helping hands were extended for the disaster victims.  One such<br \/>\nvoluntary organisation by name CASA foundation came to the rescue of the<br \/>\nfisheremen in Vembar South village.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.\tThe said organisation entered into an agreement with the Government<br \/>\nfor building of 75 houses for the Tsunami  victims in the Vambar South<br \/>\nPanchayat.  It is the case of the petitioners that the Tahsildar, Vilathikulam,<br \/>\nwrote a letter to the President of Vambar Panchayat stating that the list of 75<br \/>\nfamilies living within the 200 metres high-tide, the Government has to provide<br \/>\nthe houses, for which they wanted the Panchayat to give approval for the list of<br \/>\nnames.  In the list of 75, the names of the petitioners were found.  It was<br \/>\napproved by the Panchayat held on 08.06.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.\tThereafter, the Panchayat President made a complaint stating that in<br \/>\nthe second list forwarded by the second respondent, the names of the seven<br \/>\npetitioners have been omitted. Therefore, a request was made to include those<br \/>\nnames, as they were also living within the 200 metres high-tide.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.\tThe second respondent, Tahsildar informed the beneficiaries that<br \/>\nconstruction of 75 houses were over and since the selection of beneficiaries was<br \/>\ntaking place, in finalising the list, the left out names will be considered. The<br \/>\nPanchayat also passed a resolution on 03.03.2007 that the left out names should<br \/>\nbe included.  After sending complaints to various authorities, the present writ<br \/>\npetition was filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.\tIt is at this stage one K.S.Rajagopal a resident of the village and<br \/>\npublic spirited person (the impleaded 11th respondent ) filed a Public Interest<br \/>\nLitigation being Writ Petition No.9838 of 2006 and sought for a direction to<br \/>\nallot the houses built by CASA Foundation only to the beneficiaries living<br \/>\nwithin the 200 mtrs high tide.  A division bench of this Court by an order dated<br \/>\n02.11.2006 granted an interim injunction from handing over the keys to any of<br \/>\nthe beneficiaries.  Subsequently, the writ petition  came to be disposed of by<br \/>\nan order dated 08.02.2007, with the following directions;-<br \/>\n\t&#8220;Therefore, we consider it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition<br \/>\nwith a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the<br \/>\npetitioner dated 27.03.2006 within a period of twelve weeks from the date of<br \/>\nreceipt of a copy of this order.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.\tDespite the District Collector was directed to consider a particular<br \/>\nrequest, the present writ petition was filed and notice of motion was ordered.<br \/>\nAn interim injunction was granted by this Court on 09.05.2007 from allotting the<br \/>\nhouses.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.\tPursuant to the direction by the division bench, the second<br \/>\nrespondent convened a number of meetings including on 11.04.2007 and 30.04.2007<br \/>\nand a consensus were arrived at in that meeting regarding the names of 75<br \/>\nbeneficiaries.  Aggrieved by the consensus decision arrived, the seven<br \/>\npetitioners has approached this Court and had obtained a blanket injunction<br \/>\norder.  The contention of the seven petitioners was that the 75 houses must be<br \/>\ngiven to the list of beneficiaries found in the list dated 16.05.2005.  Attempt<br \/>\nmade by the 11th respondent and respondents 4 to 10 to vacate the interim order,<br \/>\ndid not fructify and all the houses remain unoccupied.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.\tIn the counter affidavit filed by the Tahsildar, Vilathikulam,<br \/>\ndated 29.01.2008, in paragraph Nos. 15,16 and 17, it is averred as follows:-<br \/>\n\t&#8220;15.\tIt is submitted that as already 75 deserved families list were<br \/>\napproved by the Vembar South Panchayat President on 08.06.2005 for the allotment<br \/>\nof houses, endorsement from this dated 22.08.2006 has been given to the<br \/>\napplicants of this writ petition on their representation stating that as already<br \/>\n75 beneficiaries were listed out your request will be considered and houses will<br \/>\nbe allotted later.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t16.It is submitted that as already 75 deserved families list were approved<br \/>\nby the Vembar South Panchayat President on 08.06.2005 for the allotment of<br \/>\nhouses, there is no room for the second thought of the Panchayat President to<br \/>\nrevise the list approved.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t17.It is submitted all the 75 deserved families listed out and approved by<br \/>\nthe Panchayat President of Vembar South Panchayat on 08.06.2005 will be allotted<br \/>\nhouses now constructed.  Only the applicants of this writ petition have created<br \/>\nsuch a misunderstanding among the public of the Vembar village with an intention<br \/>\nto create law and order problem and unrest among the villagers&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.\tThe District Collector, Tuticorin, pursuant to the direction issued<br \/>\nby the Division Bench \tand after getting remarks from the second respondent,<br \/>\ncalled for a meeting. After consulting the 11th respondent and other important<br \/>\npersonalities in the village along with the Regional Deputy Tahsildar, Revenue<br \/>\nInspector and Village Administrative Officers in the meeting held on 11.04.2007,<br \/>\na new list was prepared and he got it approved the names of 75 persons, who will<br \/>\nbe the beneficiaries.  Therefore, the list of beneficiaries prepared and<br \/>\napproved in the meeting held on 11.04.2007 should be the list for which the<br \/>\nhouses must be allotted.  In fact, the 7th petitioner, Savarial Packiyam&#8217;s name<br \/>\nalso finds a place in the list.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.\tIt is rather unfortunate that because of the  internecine quarrel<br \/>\nbetween the beneficiaries, a crucial project has been stalled for over two<br \/>\nyears.  The 75 houses built for the beneficiaries have been lying vacant for the<br \/>\nlast two years, thereby causing misery to many.  When the seven petitioners<br \/>\nsought to challenge the list, there is no justification for them to stall the<br \/>\nallotment of houses for 68 beneficiaries.  They ought to have restricted their<br \/>\nprayer for injunction only to seven houses.  On the contrary, the attitude of<br \/>\nthe petitioners shows their narrow-mindedness and lack of sympathy for the other<br \/>\nbrethren, who are also punished by such litigation and without notice to them.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.\tIn any event, the controversy between the parties must be brought<br \/>\ninto an end by a proper, workable and legal solution.  The first respondent had<br \/>\ntaken initiative in this regard and has finalised a list in the meeting held on<br \/>\n11.04.2007.  He had obtained broad consensus, both from groups of fishermen as<br \/>\nwell as persons involved in the Tsunami relief work.  Therefore, the writ<br \/>\npetition stands disposed of with a direction to the first respondent and the<br \/>\nsecond respondent to allot the houses identified by the District Collector vide<br \/>\nhis proceedings in I.No.4\/99059\/2004 dated 09.05.2007 forthwith and report<br \/>\ncompliance to this Court immediately thereafter. Consequently, connected M.Ps<br \/>\nare closed. No costs. A copy of the order first and second respondents<br \/>\nimmediately by the registry.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. It is also observed that since the petitioners 1 to 6 are also<br \/>\nsufferers due to Tsunami,  the first and second respondents can think of<br \/>\nproviding some solace to them also after writing to the Government and getting<br \/>\napproval to provide houses for them, if they are otherwise, eligible.\n<\/p>\n<p>ssm<\/p>\n<p>copy to:-\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The District Officer,<br \/>\n  Thoothukudi.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Tahsildar,<br \/>\n  Vilathikulam,<br \/>\n  Thoothukudi District.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The President,<br \/>\n  Vembar South Panchayat,<br \/>\n  Vembar Post,<br \/>\n  Vilathikulam Taluk,<br \/>\n  Thoothukudi District.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 BEFORE THE MADRUAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25\/09\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.K.CHANDRU W.P.No. 4505 of 2007 and W.M.P.Nos.2,3 &amp; 5 of 2008 1.Paul Nadar 2.P.Sudalaiandi Nadar 3.Raja Perumal 4.Maria Singam 5.Muthu Ganesan 6.Motchamani Jebamalai 7.Saverial Backiyam &#8230; Petitioners Vs 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-171821","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>Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - 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\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-13T07:34:08+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\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-13T07:34:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1183,\"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\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-13T07:34:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - 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\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-13T07:34:08+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\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-13T07:34:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008"},"wordCount":1183,"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\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008","name":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-13T07:34:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paul-nadar-vs-the-district-officer-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Paul Nadar vs The District Officer on 25 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/171821","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=171821"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/171821\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=171821"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=171821"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=171821"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}