{"id":179449,"date":"2007-11-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007"},"modified":"2016-05-28T14:41:05","modified_gmt":"2016-05-28T09:11:05","slug":"t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007<\/div>\n
Bench: K.G. Balakrishnan, Cj., Dr. Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nWrit Petition (civil)  202 of 1995\n\nPETITIONER:\nT.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUnion of India and Ors.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 23\/11\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nK.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ. &  DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT & S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
IN
\nI.A. Nos. 1324 & 1474
\nWITH
\nI.A. Nos. 2081-2082 @ W.P. (C) No. 549\/2007.\n<\/p>\n
In W.P. (C) No. 202\/1995.\n<\/p>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
M\/s. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd. (formerly known as “Vedanta Alumina Ltd.”) has
\nfiled an allplication before this Court seeking clearance of the proposal
\nfor use of 723.343 ha of land (including 58.943 ha of reserve forest land)
\nin Lanjigarh Tehsil of Kalahandi District for setting up Alumia Refinery.
\nThe matter has been pending since 6.3.04. The Project consists of setting
\nup of a large integrated aluminium complex in Orissa by M\/s.Vedanta
\nAluminium Ltd. (M\/s. VAL, for short).\n<\/p>\n
The short question which needs to be answered is :whether M\/s. VAL should
\nbe allowed to set up its Refinery\/Project known as “Alumina Refinery
\nProject”. As stated above the Project involves the proposal for diversion
\nof 58.943 ha of forest land.\n<\/p>\n
As a matter of preface, we may state that adherence to the principle of
\nSustainable Development is now a constitutional requirement. How much
\ndamage to the environment and ecology has got to be decided on the facts of
\neach case. While applying the principle of Sustainable Development one must
\nbear in mind that development which meets the needs of the present without
\ncompromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs
\nis Sustainable Development. Therefore, courts are required to balance
\ndevelopment needs with the protection of the environment and ecology. It is
\nthe duty of the State under our Constitution to devise and implement a
\ncoherent and co-ordinated programme to meet its obligation of Sustainable
\nDevelopment based on inter-generational equity (See: A.P. Pollution Control
\nBoard v. Proof. M.V. Nayudu,<\/a> [1999] 2 SCC 718. Mining is an important
\nrevenue generating industry. However, we cannot allow our national assets
\nto be placed into the hands of companies without proper mechanism in place
\nand without ascertaining the credibility of the User Agency.\n<\/p>\n
It is not in dispute that in this case mining of bauxite deposits is
\nrequired to take place on the top of Niyamgiri Hills. MOEF has given an
\nenvironment clearance for Alumina Refinery Project. All requisite
\npermissions have been obtained by the said applicant. The Refinery to be
\nconstructed by M\/s. VAL is one million ton Alumina Refinery at Lanjigarh at
\nan estimated cost of Rs. 4000 crores. The mining lease shall stand in the
\nname of OMC Ltd. (State Undertaking). The agreement between OMC Ltd. and
\nM\/s. VAL indicates that it is a joint venture in which M\/s. VAL is a
\ncontractor. The agreement further indicates that the material will be sold
\nby the lessee to M\/s.VAL.\n<\/p>\n
CEC has objected to the grant of clearance as sought by M\/s. VAL on the
\nground inter alia that the Refinery is totally dependent on mining of
\nbauxite from Niyamgiri Hills, Lanjigarh, which is the only vital wildlife
\nhabitat, part of which constitutes elephant corridor and also on the ground
\nthat the said Project, including the mining area, would obstruct the
\nproposed wildlife sanctuary and the residence of tribes like Dongaria
\nKandha. According to CEC, Niyamgiri Hills would be vitally affected if
\nmining is allowed in the above area as Niyamgiri Hills is an important
\nwater source for two rivers. According to CEC, the Project would also
\ndestroy flora and fauna of the entire region and it would result in soil
\nerosion. According to CEC, use of forest land in an ecologically sensitive
\narea like Niyamgiri Hills should not permitted.\n<\/p>\n
On the other side, we have a picture of abject poverty in which the local
\npeople are living in Lanjigarh Tehsil including the tribal people. There is
\nno proper housing. There are no hospitals. There are no schools and people
\nare living in extremely poor conditions which is not in dispute.\n<\/p>\n
Indian economy for last couple of years has been growing at the rate of 8
\nto 9% of GDP. It is a remarkable achievement. However, accelerated growth
\nrate of GDP does not provide Inclusive Growth. Keeping in mind the two
\nextremes, this Court thought of balancing development vis-a-vis protection
\nof wildlife ecology and environment in view of the principle of Sustainable
\nDevelopment.\n<\/p>\n
At this stage, we may observe that M\/s. VAL has obtained all necessary
\nclearances. It now seeks clearance of the Project from this Court before it
\nis placed before the Central Government.\n<\/p>\n
The matter was heard at length on 26.10.07. At that time, we were informed
\nthat M\/s. VAL is a subsidiary of M\/s. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.
\n(M\/s. SIIL, for short) and that M\/s. SIIL shall provide jobs on permanent
\nbasis to the tribals, particularly, land-losers. Since then we have
\nreceived two affidavits both dated 2.11.07. In the first affidavit, filed
\nby M\/s. VAL, it is stated that plant maintenance, power plant operations,
\nhouse keeping, canteen, material handling etc. Will be outsourced. There is
\nno positive statement as to the number of persons who would get jobs on
\npermanent basis. The statement refers only to the potentiality to employ.
\nThere is no study made in that regard. There is no statement as to in which
\ncategory they would be fitted. It is important to note that the Project is
\nfunded by Vedanta Resources (a U.K.- based company). According to the
\nnewspaper reports Vedanta Resources has been banned from Norway for non-
\ncompliance of labour laws and for violation of human rights. We quote
\nhereinbelow the extract from the economic daily which is recently appeared
\nin one of the dailies:\n<\/p>\n
“Norway dumps Vedanta from oil fund<\/p>\n
Reuters<\/p>\n
OSLO<\/p>\n
\tNORWAY has dropped British mining and metals group Vedanta
\n\tResources from its $350 billion oil fund at the recommendation of
\n\tthe fund’s ethics council, which blamed it for environmental damage
\n\tand human rights violations, the finance ministry said.\n<\/p>\n
\tNorway’s Government Pension Fund invests Norway’s petroleum wealth
\n\tin foreign stocks and bonds to save for when the oil and gas run
\n\tout. It is one of the world’s biggest sovereign wealth funds.
\n\t“According to the recommendation (of the council), the Fund runs
\n\tand unacceptable risk of complicity in present and future severe
\n\tenvironmental damage and systematic human rights violations by
\n\tcontinuing to invest in the company”, the finance ministry said.\n<\/p>\n
\tVedanta Resources’ core business is mining and production of
\n\tcopper, aluminium and zinc in India. It also has operations in
\n\tAustralia, Zambia and Armenia. ” Vedanta Resources is accused of
\n\thaving caused environmental damage and contributed to human and
\n\tlabour rights violations”, the ethics council said. “Vedanta is
\n\taccused of having caused environmental damage and contributed to
\n\thuman and labour rights violations”, the ethics council said.”\n<\/p>\n
We do not wish to express any opinion on the correctness of the said
\nReport. However, we cannot take the risk of handing over an important asset
\ninto the hands of the company unless we are satisfied about its
\ncredibility. As stated above, under the Agreement between OMC Ltd. and M\/s.
\nVAL,the name of the contractor is M\/s.VAL. The Agreement states that M\/s.
\nVAL is the subsidiary of M\/s. SIIL. However, the Financial Statements
\nannexed to the affidavit of M\/s. SIIL dated 2.11.07 shows that M\/s. VAL is
\nan associate company and not a subsidiary of M\/s. SIIL (See: page 31 of the
\naffidavit filed by M\/s. SIIL). On going through the Financial Statements of
\nM\/s. SIIL, we find that the operating profits from aluminium segment is
\nnegligible for the years ending on 31.3.06 and 31.3.07 (See: page 65 of the
\naffidavit filed by M\/s. SIIL). However, under Segment Reporting (in the
\nAudited Financial Statement) the income from aluminium segment is Rs. 455
\ncrores (See: website of SIIL). We do not have the list of assets of M\/s.
\nVAL. Lastly, as stated above, M\/s. VAL is a joint venture partner with OMC
\nLtd. Nothing prevents M\/s. VAL from terminating joint venture agreement. We
\ndo not have even the Accounts of M\/s. VAL. In the circumstances keeping in
\nmind the totality of the above factors, we are not inclined to clear the
\nProject.\n<\/p>\n
Suggested Rehabilitation Package:\n<\/p>\n
Liberty is, however, given to M\/s. SIIL to move this Court if they are
\nagree to comply with the following modalities as suggested by this Court.
\nIt is made clear that such an application will not be entertained if made
\nby M\/s. VAL or by Vedanta Resources.\n<\/p>\n
(i)\tState of Orissa shall float a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for
\nscheduled area development of Lanjigarh Project in which the stake-holders
\nshall be State of Orissa, OMC Ltd. and M\/s. SIIL. Such SPV shall be
\nincorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The Accounts of SPC will be
\nprepared by the Statutory auditors of OMC Ltd. and they shall be audited by
\nthe Auditor General for State of Orissa every year. M\/s. SIIL will deposit,
\nevery year commencing from 1.4.07, 5% of its annual profits before tax and
\ninterest from Lanjigarh Project or Rs. 10 crores whichever is higher for
\nScheduled Area Development with the said SPV and it shall be the duty of
\nthe said SPV to account for the expenses each year. The annual report of
\nSPV shall be submitted to CEC every year. If CEC finds non-utilisation or
\nmis-utilisation of funds the same shall be brought to the notice of this
\nCourt. While calculating annual profits before tax and interest M\/s. SIIL
\nshall do so on the basis of the market value of the material which is sold
\nby OMC Ltd. M\/s. SIIL or its nominee.\n<\/p>\n
(ii)\tIn addition to what is stated above, M\/s. SIIL shall pay NPV of
\nRs.55 crores and Rs.50.53 crores towards Wildlife Management Plan for
\nConservation and Management of Wildlife around Lanjigarh bauxite mine and
\nRs. 12.20 crores towards tribal development. In addition, M\/s. SIIL shall
\nalso bear expenses towards compensatory afforestation.\n<\/p>\n
(iii)\tA statement shall be filed by M\/s. SIIL with CEC within eight weeks
\nfrom today stating number of persons who shall be observed on permanent
\nbasis in M\/s. SIIL including land-losers. They shall give categories in
\nwhich they would be permanently absorbed. The list would also show
\nparticulars of persons who would be employed by the contractors of M\/s.
\nSIIL and the period for which they would be employed.\n<\/p>\n
(iv)\tThe state Government has the following suggestions on this issue:-\n<\/p>\n
1.\tThe user agency shall undertake demarcation of the lease area on
\nthe ground using four feet high cement concrete pillars with serial number,
\nforward and back bearings and distance from pillar to pillar.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tThe user agency shall make arrangements for mutation and transfer
\nof equivalent non-forest land identified for compensatory afforestation to
\nthe ownership of the State Forest Department.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tThe State Forest Department will take up compensatory afforestation
\nat project cost with suitable indigenous species and will declare the said
\narea identified for compensatory afforstation as “protected forest” under
\nthe Orissa Forest Act 1972 for the purpose of management.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tThe user agency shall undertake Rehabilitation of Project affected
\nfamilies, if any as per the Orissa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy
\n2006.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tThe user agency shall undertake Phased reclamation of mined out
\narea. All overburden should be used for back filling and reclamation of the
\nmined out areas.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tThe user agency shall undertake fencing of the safety zone area and
\nendeavour for protection as well as regeneration of the said area. It shall
\ndeposit funds with the State Forest Deptt. for the protection and
\nregeneration of the safety zone area.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tAdequate soil conservation measures shall be undertaken by the
\nLessee on the overburden dumps to prevent contamination of steam flow.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tThe user agency should undertake comprehensive study on
\nhydrogeology of the area and the impact of mining on the surrounding water
\nquality and stream flow at regular interval and take effective measures so
\nas to maintain the pre mining water condition as far as possible.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tThe user agency should undertake a comprehensive study of the wild
\nlife available in the area in association with institutes of repute like
\nWild Life Institute of India, Dehradun, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun
\netc. and shall prepare a site specific comprehensive Wild Life Management
\nplan for conservation and management of the wild life in the project impact
\nare under the guidance of Chief Wild Life Warden of the State.\n<\/p>\n
10.\tThe user agency shall deposit the NPV of the forest land sought for
\ndiversion for undertaking mining operations.\n<\/p>\n
11.\tThe user agency shall prepare a comprehensive plan for the
\ndevelopment of tribals in the project impact area taking into consideration
\ntheir requirements for health, education, communication, recreation,
\nlivelihood and cultural lifestyle.\n<\/p>\n
12.\tAs per the policy of the State Government, the user agency shall
\nearmark 5% of the net profit accrued in the project to be spent for the
\ndevelopment of health, education, communication, irrigation and agriculture
\nof the said schedule area within a radius of 50 Kms.\n<\/p>\n
13.\tControlled Blasting may be used only in exigencies wherever needed
\nto minimize the impact of noise on wild life of the area.\n<\/p>\n
14.\tThe User Agency shall undertake development of greenery by way of
\nplantation of suitable indigenous species in all vacant areas within the
\nproject.\n<\/p>\n
15.\tTrees shall be felled from the diverted area only when it is
\nnecessary with the strict supervision of the State Deptt. at the cost of
\nthe project.\n<\/p>\n
16.\tThe forest land diverted shall be non transferable. Whenever the
\nforest land is not required, the same shall be surrendered to the State
\nForest Deptt. under intimation to Ministry of Environment and Forests,
\nGovernment of India.\n<\/p>\n
If M\/s. SIIL, State of Orissa and OMC Ltd. jointly agree to comply with the
\nabove Rehabilitation Package, this Court may consider granting of clearance
\nto the Project.\n<\/p>\n
CONCLUSION<\/p>\n
If M\/s. SIIL Is agreeable to the aforestated Rehabilitation Package then
\nthey shall be at liberty to move this Court by initiating a proper
\napplication. This Court is not against the Project in principle. It only
\nseeks safeguards by which we are able to protect nature and subserve
\ndevelopment. I.As. are disposed of accordingly. However, we once again
\nreiterate that the applications filed by M\/s. stand dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007 Bench: K.G. Balakrishnan, Cj., Dr. Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Writ Petition (civil) 202 of 1995 PETITIONER: T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad RESPONDENT: Union of India and Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23\/11\/2007 BENCH: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJ. & DR. ARIJIT […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179449","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nT.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 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\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-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=\"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-28T09:11:05+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-28T09:11:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2377,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\",\"name\":\"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-28T09:11:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 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":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 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\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-28T09:11:05+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-28T09:11:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007"},"wordCount":2377,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007","name":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-28T09:11:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-godavaraman-thirumulpad-vs-union-of-india-and-ors-on-23-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.N. Godavaraman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India And Ors on 23 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\/179449","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=179449"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179449\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179449"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179449"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179449"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}