{"id":173244,"date":"2007-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-01-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007"},"modified":"2014-06-27T20:06:39","modified_gmt":"2014-06-27T14:36:39","slug":"p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","title":{"rendered":"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP No. 16264 of 1996(J)\n\n\n\n1. P.BALACHANDRAN PARAKKATTIL\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.E.SUBRAMANI (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :16\/01\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                                   S. Siri Jagan,  J.\n\n                      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n\n                              O.P. No. 16264 of 1996\n\n                      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n\n                       Dated this, the 16th January, 2007.\n\n\n                                  J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
       Petitioner   has   approached   this   Court     with   a   grievance   that<\/p>\n
although   he   was   eligible   to   be  considered   for   inclusion   in   the   select<\/p>\n
list for the year 1984  for promotion to the post of Excise Inspectors,<\/p>\n
he was not so included.  The explanation given by the Government for<\/p>\n
non-consideration of the petitioner for inclusion in the 1984 select list<\/p>\n
was that he was too junior among the persons who were eligible to be<\/p>\n
considered   and   since   others   senior   to   him   were   considered   and<\/p>\n
included   in   the   list,   the   petitioner   was   excluded.     But   the   petitioner<\/p>\n
has   filed   a   reply   affidavit   in   which   he   categorically   asserts   that<\/p>\n
respondents  3  to   10   who  were   actually   included  in  the  list   were   not<\/p>\n
eligible to be included in the select list because at the relevant time,<\/p>\n
they   did   not   have   the   obligatory   test   qualification   prescribed   for<\/p>\n
eligibility   for   promotion   to   the   post   of   Excise   Inspector.   This<\/p>\n
obligatory   test   qualification   was   introduced   as   an   eligibility<\/p>\n
qualification     as   per   G.O(P)   No.   36\/82\/TD   dated   14-5-1982   as   per<\/p>\n
which,   for   promotion   to   the   post   of   Excise   Inspectors,   a   pass   in<\/p>\n
obligatory   test   in   District   Office   Manual   or   Manual   of   Office<\/p>\n
Procedure  were made mandatory.    However, by a Note to Rule 6 of<\/p>\n
Excise   and   Prohibition   Subordinate   Service   Rules,   the   existing<\/p>\n
Preventive Officers were given time to pass the test.   As per the said<\/p>\n
Note, they should have passed the test within two years or within four<\/p>\n
chances   from   the   date   of   issue   of   the   order,   which   is   14-5-1982.<\/p>\n
Originally,   in   the   counter   affidavit   stated   to   have   been   filed   by   the<\/p>\n
State, which is not available in the files, but copy   of which has been<\/p>\n
made available for perusal, the contention was that respondents 3 to<\/p>\n
10   had   in   fact   passed   the   obligatory   test   within   the   four   chances.<\/p>\n
However, the petitioner along with his  reply affidavit produced copies<\/p>\n
of Gazette notifications by which the results of five departmental tests<\/p>\n
O.P. No. 16264\/1996                      -:  2  :-<\/span><\/p>\n
were published by the Kerala Public Service Commission.  Relying on<\/p>\n
the   same,   the   petitioner   would   submit   that   after   publication   of   the<\/p>\n
Government Order dated 14-5-1982 making the obligatory test an an<\/p>\n
eligibility   condition   for   promotion,   five   departmental   tests   were<\/p>\n
conducted   and   respondents   3   to   10   passed   the   test   only   in   the   5th<\/p>\n
chance after   the  date  of  the  order   and  therefore  for   inclusion   in  the<\/p>\n
select list for 1984, respondents 3 to 10 were not eligible.  Yesterday,<\/p>\n
an  affidavit   has   been   filed   on   behalf   of   the  respondents   wherein   the<\/p>\n
State   has   tried   to   give   a   different   explanation   for   inclusion   of<\/p>\n
respondents 3 to 10 in the select list for 1984.   Although G.O(P) No.<\/p>\n
36\/82 was issued on 14-5-1982, it was actually notified in the Gazette<\/p>\n
only on 6-7-1982.  The notification of the PSC to which Ext. P2 relates<\/p>\n
was   issued   on   27-4-1982   and   the   last   day   for   submission   of   the<\/p>\n
application  for  the  post   was   9-6-1982.     Since   the   Government   Order<\/p>\n
was   notified   in   the   Gazette   on   6-7-1982,   the   officers   could   not   have<\/p>\n
applied for that test since the last date for   submission of application<\/p>\n
was   9-6-1982.     On   that   reasoning,   they   would   submit   that   the   test<\/p>\n
which respondents 3 to 10 passed was in the 4th chance and therefore<\/p>\n
they were eligible for consideration for inclusion in the select list for<\/p>\n
the year 1984.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       2.  But the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that this<\/p>\n
contention   would   not   hold   water   because   the   Note   to   Rule   6   of   the<\/p>\n
Special Rules states that  the two years or four chances given to   the<\/p>\n
officers were from the date of issue of the orders, which is 14-5-1982<\/p>\n
and  since   the  last   date   for  submission  of  application   relating  to   Ext.<\/p>\n
P2   result   was   9-6-1982,   they   should   be   taken   as   the   first   chance<\/p>\n
available   to   respondents   3   to   10   for   passing   the   obligatory<\/p>\n
departmental test.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       3.  I have considered the rival contentions in detail.<\/p>\n
       4.  Now, the only question requires to be decided by me is as to<\/p>\n
O.P. No. 16264\/1996                          -:  3  :-<\/span><\/p>\n
whether respondents 3 to 10 have passed the obligatory departmental<\/p>\n
test within the four chances available to them from the date of issue of<\/p>\n
the  orders   making     a   pass   in   the  obligatory   departmental   test   as   an<\/p>\n
eligibility   condition   for   consideration   for   promotion   to   the   post   of<\/p>\n
Excise Inspectors.  Admittedly, G.O(P) No. 36\/82\/TD was issued on 14-<\/p>\n
5-1982.  Note to Rule 6 of the Special Rules reads thus:<\/p>\n
                       “Note:-    Two  years  or  four   chances  shall  be  given  for<\/p>\n
               the   officers   to   pass   the   Departmental   Tests   viz.   Manual   of<\/p>\n
               Office   Procedure   or   District   Office   Manual   from   the   date   of<\/p>\n
               issue of the orders.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
This note  specifically states that the four chances given to the Excise<\/p>\n
Preventive Officers in service are from the date of issue of the orders.<\/p>\n
If  that is taken as the date, then   the  result in respect of which was<\/p>\n
published   by   Ext.   P2   is   certainly   the   first   chance   available   to<\/p>\n
respondents 3 to 10 to secure the test qualification, since the last date<\/p>\n
for submission of application in respect of that test was admittedly 9-<\/p>\n
6-1982, which was subsequent to the date of issue of G.O(P) No. 36\/82<\/p>\n
dated 14-5-1982. I am not inclined to   accept the contention taken in<\/p>\n
the  affidavit   dated   15-1-2006   filed   on  behalf   of   respondents  1   and   2<\/p>\n
that   the   four   chances   have   to   be   calculated   from   the   date   of   the<\/p>\n
notification   of   the   Government   Order   in   the   Gazette,   namely,   6-7-<\/p>\n
1982.     That   is   not   what   is   stated   in   the   Special   Rules.     The   Special<\/p>\n
Rules specifically state that four chances is from the date of issue of<\/p>\n
the   orders,   which   evidently   is   14-5-1982.     That   being   so,   clearly,<\/p>\n
respondents   3   to   10   have   passed   the   obligatory   test   only   in   the   5th<\/p>\n
chance.   Therefore,  they could have been considered for inclusion  in<\/p>\n
the select list only subsequent to passing of their test and not in the<\/p>\n
1984   select  list.     If  they   are  excluded   from  the  field  of   choice,   then,<\/p>\n
certainly   the   petitioner   would   be   entitled   to   be   considered   for<\/p>\n
inclusion in the  1984   select list, which fact has not  been disputed in<\/p>\n
the affidavit.  That being so, I am of opinion that the petitioner should<\/p>\n
O.P. No. 16264\/1996                           -:  4  :-<\/span><\/p>\n
have been considered for inclusion in the select list for the year 1984.<\/p>\n
        5.       It is submitted before me that respondents 3 to 10 are no<\/p>\n
longer   in   service,   they   having                       retired   from   service   on<\/p>\n
superannuation.   However,   since   the   petitioner   has   not   been<\/p>\n
considered   for   inclusion   in   the   1984   select   list,   although   he   was<\/p>\n
eligible, for no  fault of his, I am of opinion that since he was  actually<\/p>\n
entitled to be considered inclusion   in the 1984 select list, he should<\/p>\n
be   given   notional   benefits   of   fixation   of   pay   on   that   basis,   if   found<\/p>\n
suitable otherwise.   In the above circumstances, the  original petition<\/p>\n
is disposed of with the following directions.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        A   Review   Departmental   Promotion   Committee   constituted   for<\/p>\n
the purpose   shall consider the case of the petitioner for inclusion in<\/p>\n
the   1984   select   list   on   the   basis   that   respondents   3   to   10   were   not<\/p>\n
eligible to be considered to be included in the 1984 select list.  If he is<\/p>\n
found   to   be   entitled   to   be   included   in   the   select   list   for   1984,   he<\/p>\n
should   be   given   promotion   with   effect   from     the   date   when   the<\/p>\n
vacancy   relating   to   1984   select   list   arose   and   he   should   be   given<\/p>\n
notional fixation in the promoted post with effect from that date   and<\/p>\n
all further   dates of promotion of the petitioner   shall also be revised<\/p>\n
accordingly.  However, I make it clear that the petitioner would not be<\/p>\n
entitled to monetary benefits arising therefrom till today.   The entire<\/p>\n
exercise shall be completed before the petitioner retires from service<\/p>\n
on 28-2-2007.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                         Sd\/-  S. Siri Jagan,  Judge.\n<\/p>\n
\nTds\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP No. 16264 of 1996(J) 1. P.BALACHANDRAN PARAKKATTIL … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.E.SUBRAMANI (SR.) For Respondent :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR The Hon’ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN Dated :16\/01\/2007 O R […]<\/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-173244","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nP.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - 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\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-27T14:36:39+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\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-27T14:36:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1280,\"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\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\",\"name\":\"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-27T14:36:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 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.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - 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\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-27T14:36:39+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\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007","datePublished":"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-27T14:36:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007"},"wordCount":1280,"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\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007","name":"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-27T14:36:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-balachandran-parakkattil-vs-state-of-kerala-on-16-january-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.Balachandran Parakkattil vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 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\/173244","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=173244"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173244\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173244"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173244"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173244"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}