{"id":182834,"date":"2005-07-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-07-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005"},"modified":"2015-08-09T20:37:07","modified_gmt":"2015-08-09T15:07:07","slug":"palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","title":{"rendered":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDated: 25\/07\/2005 \n\nCoram \n\nThe Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM   \nand \nThe Hon'ble Mr. Justice AR.RAMALINGAM    \n\nH.C.P. No.381 of 2005 \n\n\nPalanisamy                                     ... Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. District Collector\n    and District Magistrate,\nCoimbatore District,\nCoimbatore. \n\n2. The Secretary to the Government\n   of Tamil Nadu\nProhibition and Excise Department,\nFort St. George,\nChennai-600 009.                                ... Respondents\n\n        Petition under Article 226  of  the  Constitution  of  India  for  the\nissuance   of   Writ   of   Habeas   Corpus   to   call  for  the  records  in\nCr.M.P.No.03\/B.L\/2005\/E4 on the  file  of  the  first  respondent,  quash  the\ndetention order dated 4.2.2005 and direct the production of the detenu Subban,\nson  of  Thannasi, presently detained at the Central Prison, Coimbatore, under\nthe Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 before this Honourable  Court  and  set  him  at\nliberty.\n\n!For Petitioner         :  Mr.A.M.Rahamath Ali\n\n^For Respondents        :  Mr.V.Arul,\n                Govt.  Advocate (Crl.  Side)\n\n:O R D E R \n<\/pre>\n<p>(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.)   <\/p>\n<p>        The petitioner is the son of the detenu by name Subban.  He challenges<br \/>\nthe impugned proceedings dated 04.02.2005, branding the detenu as &#8216;Bootlegger&#8217;<br \/>\nas contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Prevention  of  Dangerous  Activities  of<br \/>\nBootleggers,  Drug  Offenders,  Forest  Offenders,  Goondas,  Immoral  Traffic<br \/>\nOffenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  After taking us through the grounds of  detention  and  all  other<br \/>\nconnected  materials,  learned  counsel  for  the  petitioner  has  raised the<br \/>\nfollowing contentions:-\n<\/p>\n<p>                (a) There is inordinate delay in communicating  the  rejection<br \/>\nletter to the detenu, which vitiates the ultimate order of detention.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (b)  Copy  of  the  special requisition made by the Sponsoring<br \/>\nAuthority to the Court for sending the samples to the Laboratory has not  been<br \/>\nfurnished to the detenu.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (c)  Though  the  detenu  was  served  with copy of the orders<br \/>\npassed in four adverse cases, in spite of the  request  made  by  the  detenu,<br \/>\ncopies  of  all  the  materials connected to those cases were not furnished to<\/p>\n<p>him.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (d) In view of the discrepancy at page No.33  of  the  Booklet<br \/>\nsupplied to the detenu, the detention order is liable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.   Coming  to  the first contention regarding delay, the particulars<br \/>\nfurnished by the learned Government Advocate show that the  representation  of<br \/>\nthe  detenu  was received by the Government on 05.04.2005, remarks were called<br \/>\nfor on 06.04.2005 and the same were received on  12.04.2005.    The  File  was<br \/>\ndealt with by the Deputy Secretary on 13.04.2005 and finally, the Minister for<br \/>\nProhibition and  Excise  passed  orders  on  15.04.2005.  Rejection letter was<br \/>\nprepared on 18.04.2005.  The said letter was sent to the detenu on  19.04.2005<br \/>\nand served  to  the  detenu on 23.04.2005.  Learned counsel for the petitioner<br \/>\nmainly relied on the delay between 19.04.2005 and 23.04.2005.  It  is  brought<br \/>\nto  our  notice that the rejection order was passed by the competent authority<br \/>\nat Chennai and after preparation of the rejection letter, the same was sent to<br \/>\nthe detenu, who was detained in the  Central  Prison  at  Coimbatore,  due  to<br \/>\nwhich, the  same  was  served  only  on 23.04.2005.  It is also brought to our<br \/>\nnotice that 22.04.2005 being a Holiday, if we exclude the said date, it cannot<br \/>\nbe said that there is enormous delay as claimed by the petitioner.   On  going<br \/>\nthrough  the materials, we hold that it cannot be claimed that there was undue<br \/>\ndelay on the part of the authorities in disposal of the representation of  the<br \/>\ndetenu.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   Coming  to  the  second  contention,  namely, copy of the special<br \/>\nrequisition made by the  Sponsoring  Authority  to  the  Judicial  Magistrate,<br \/>\nMettupalayam, for sending the samples to the Laboratory for chemical analysis,<br \/>\nhas  not  been  supplied  to  the  detenu,  it  is the argument of the learned<br \/>\nGovernment Advocate that it is only a referred to document and  not  a  relied<br \/>\nupon  document,  for  which,  the  detenu  is  entitled to a copy of the same.<br \/>\nLearned counsel appearing for the petitioner, by drawing our attention to  the<br \/>\ndecision  rendered in HCP No.173 of 200 5, dated 18.03.2005, would submit that<br \/>\nin the absence of supply of copy of the said document, the detention order  is<br \/>\nliable to  be quashed.  We have gone through the factual position in that case<br \/>\nand the decision rendered therein.   Though  a  reference  has  been  made  in<br \/>\nparagraph No.3(c) of the grounds of detention regarding the requisition to the<br \/>\nJudicial  Magistrate,  Mettupalayam, for sending the samples to the Laboratory<br \/>\nfor chemical analysis, we are of the view that  the  document,  viz.,  special<br \/>\nrequisition,  cannot  be  a  relied  upon  document  as claimed by the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the petitioner.  It is also not in  dispute  that  the  detenu  is<br \/>\nentitled  to a copy only with regard to a relied upon document and in the case<br \/>\nof a referred to document, unless the detenu shows\/establishes that  prejudice<br \/>\nhas  been  caused to him due to non-supply of such referred to document, there<br \/>\nis no need to supply the same.  On going through the  said  paragraph  in  the<br \/>\ngrounds  of  detention,  namely,  3(c),  taking  note  of  the  claim  of  the<br \/>\nrespondents that it is only a referred to document, and in the absence of  any<br \/>\nprejudice shown, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the  petitioner.    The  decision relied on by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner is not applicable to the case on hand.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  Coming to the third contention, it is not in dispute that all  the<br \/>\nfour adverse cases referred to in the grounds of dentition ended in conviction<br \/>\nand the  detenu  was  set off taking note of his period in prison.  It is also<br \/>\nnot in dispute that the detenu was served with copies of the F.I.R.,  calendar<br \/>\nextract etc.     and  the  ultimate  order  passed  by  the  learned  Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate, Mettupalayam.  Learned Government  Advocate  has  brought  to  our<br \/>\nnotice  the  confession statement of the accused, wherein, he has admitted his<br \/>\ninvolvement in other cases prior to the adverse cases.  In such circumstances,<br \/>\nwe are of the view that the claim made by the petitioner cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  Coming to the last contention,  namely,  discrepancy  in  the  FIR<br \/>\ndated 14.01.2005,  we  verified  the  same.    It  is  seen  that when the Sub<br \/>\nInspector of Police was in the  Police  Station,  at  about  13.00  Hours,  on<br \/>\n14.01.2005,  the  complainant  by  name  Pathirappan made a written complaint,<br \/>\nwhich was addressed to the Inspector of Police for  taking  necessary  action.<br \/>\nAccordingly, we  find  no discrepancy as claimed by the petitioner.  To put it<br \/>\nclear, though the complaint was addressed  to  the  Inspector  of  Police  for<br \/>\nnecessary  action,  the  same was handed over in the Police Station to the Sub<br \/>\nInspector of Police, who was there at 1 P.M.  on 14.01.2005.  We are satisfied<br \/>\nthat there is no discrepancy which goes to the root of the matter as claimed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.  In these circumstances, we  do  not  find  any  valid  ground  for<br \/>\ninterference.  H.C.P.  fails and the same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>JI.\n<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The District Collector, Coimbatore District.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise     Department,  Fort  St.<br \/>\nGeorge, Chennai 600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (In duplicate for communication to detenu)\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order)<br \/>\n        Fort St.  George, Chennai-9.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.  The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 25\/07\/2005 Coram The Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM and The Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice AR.RAMALINGAM H.C.P. No.381 of 2005 Palanisamy &#8230; Petitioner -Vs- 1. District Collector and District Magistrate, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore. 2. The Secretary to 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-182834","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>Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - 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\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\" \/>\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=\"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-09T15:07:07+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\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-09T15:07:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1037,\"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\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\",\"name\":\"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-09T15:07:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005\"}]},{\"@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":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - 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\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-09T15:07:07+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\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005","datePublished":"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-09T15:07:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005"},"wordCount":1037,"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\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005","name":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-09T15:07:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanisamy-vs-district-collector-on-25-july-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Palanisamy vs District Collector on 25 July, 2005"}]},{"@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\/182834","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=182834"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/182834\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=182834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=182834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=182834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}