{"id":18833,"date":"2011-01-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-01-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011"},"modified":"2017-10-09T01:44:33","modified_gmt":"2017-10-08T20:14:33","slug":"a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","title":{"rendered":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 149 of 2011(P)\n\n\n1. A.SREEKUMAR, \"SRUTHI\" INDIRA NAGAR,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. MANI.R., VADATHODE,\n3. P.S.GOPALAKRISHNA IYER, KARTHIKA,\n4. C.KRISHNAN, D&amp;D NIVAS, VADATHODE,\n5. RAJAMANI.P., RAMLATH HOUSE, VADATHODE,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, HRMS,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SMT.P.K.RADHIKA\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :04\/01\/2011\n\n O R D E R\n                           S. SIRI JAGAN, J.\n                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                        W.P.(C)No. 149 of 2011\n                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n             Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011\n\n                              J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>      The petitioners were employees of the Kerala State Electricity<\/p>\n<p>Board. They have retired from service subsequent to 1.7.2003. After<\/p>\n<p>their retirement, the scales of pay of the employees of the Kerala<\/p>\n<p>State Electricity Board have been revised with retrospective effect<\/p>\n<p>from the date prior to their retirement. The petitioners&#8217; grievance in<\/p>\n<p>this writ petition is that although their pay was revised accordingly,<\/p>\n<p>the petitioners were not paid revised DCRG and commuted value of<\/p>\n<p>pension in terms of the pay revision. The petitioners therefore seek<\/p>\n<p>the following reliefs:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;(a)  Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,<br \/>\n      order or direction to extend the benefits of enhanced DCRG and<br \/>\n      enhanced rate of commutation of pension on the revised pension<br \/>\n      consequent on the revision of pay.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      (b)   issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ,<br \/>\n      order or direction calling for the records leading to the issuance of<br \/>\n      clause 6.1, 7.1 and 7.2 of Ext. P1 order and to quash the provisions<br \/>\n      discriminating pensioners based on the date of retirement.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for Electricity<\/p>\n<p>Board.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3. An identical question was considered by a learned d Judge of<\/p>\n<p>this Court in a batch of writ petitions, viz. W.P(C) Nos.26661, 30613,<\/p>\n<p>31366, 34565 &amp; 37707\/2009 and 2158\/2010. In that judgment, it<\/p>\n<p>was held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C)No. 149 of 2011<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                       -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>             &#8220;Issue raised in these writ petitions are common and<br \/>\n      therefore the cases were heard together and are disposed of by<br \/>\n      common judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>             2.    Petitioners were employees of the Kerala State<br \/>\n      Electricity Board, who have retired from service on various dates<br \/>\n      subsequent to 1.7.2003. In these writ petitions they challenge<br \/>\n      some of the provisions of the Board Order.No.2748\/2008<br \/>\n      (PS1\/1428\/2007) dated 11.11.2008. While some of the petitioners<br \/>\n      are challenging clause (6) providing for a ceiling of DCRG, the<br \/>\n      other petitioners are challenging clause 7.1 and 7.2 providing for<br \/>\n      commutation of pension and restoration of commuted portion of<br \/>\n      pension.\n<\/p>\n<p>             3. The impugned provisions Ext.P1 Board order referred to<br \/>\n      above, are extracted below for reference.\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>          &#8221; Ceiling on Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity(DCRG)<\/p>\n<p>          6.1 The ceiling of the maximum amount of DCRG will be raised<br \/>\n          from Rs.2,80,000\/- to Rs.3,30,000\/- to those who retired on or<br \/>\n          after 1.8.2006. Those who retired before1.8.2006 are eligible<br \/>\n          only for DCRG amount limited to Rs.2.80 lakhs only. All other<br \/>\n          conditions   governing   payment    of  DCRG     shall  remain<br \/>\n          unchanged.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          Commutation of Pension and restoration of Commuted Portion<br \/>\n          of Pension.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          7.1 The existing rate of 1\/3rd of the Basic Pension for<br \/>\n          commutation of pension will be enhanced to 40% of the pension<br \/>\n          based on the revised pay, in the case of retirement on or after<br \/>\n          1.9.2007.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          7.2 Those who retired from 1.7.2003 to 31.8.2007, are entitled<br \/>\n          to commute only 1\/3rd of the pension admissible on the pre-<br \/>\n          revised pay and they are not entitled to commute 1\/3rd of the<br \/>\n          pension admissible on the revised pay. In the case of<br \/>\n          commutation, already settled cases will not be reopened.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>             4. The main contention raised by the petitioners is that,<br \/>\n      being retired employee of the Board, all the pensioners form one<br \/>\n      class. It is stated that by the aforesaid provisions of Ext.P1 Board<br \/>\n      order, the existing benefits of DCRG and the commuted value of<br \/>\n      pension were revised.       According to them while revising or<br \/>\n      liberalizing   the    benefits,   the    existing    one   class   of<br \/>\n      pensioners\/beneficiaries, have been classified into two, on the<br \/>\n      basis of a cut off date fixed by the Board and that on the basis of<br \/>\n      the cut off date, those who retired prior to the cut off date are<br \/>\n      denied the revised benefit, while those who have retired<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C)No. 149 of 2011<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      subsequent to the cut off date have been given the revised<br \/>\n      benefits. It is contended that such classification is irrational and<br \/>\n      opposed to th law laid down by the Apex Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1416283\/\">D.S.Nakara &amp;<br \/>\n      Ors. V. Union of India<\/a> ( AIR 1983 SCC 130) and therefore the<br \/>\n      petitioners are entitled to the benefits as revised by Ext.P1 on a<br \/>\n      par with those who have retired, after the cut off dates.\n<\/p>\n<p>             5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Board. In the<br \/>\n      counter affidavit no justification is forthcoming regarding the<br \/>\n      fixation of the cut off date as incorporated in the impugned<br \/>\n      provisions of the Board order. Board also has not succeeded in<br \/>\n      showing that the benefits provided in the impugned provisions are<br \/>\n      anything other than revision of the existing benefits. They have<br \/>\n      also not put forward any other justification for fixing such a cut off<br \/>\n      date.\n<\/p>\n<p>             6. In such a situation, in my view, having regard to the law<br \/>\n      laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment referred to above, the<br \/>\n      cut off date introduced and the discrimination of one set of<br \/>\n      pensioners is unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>             7. In the judgment in Nakara&#8217;s case, after referring to the<br \/>\n      various precedents it was held that pension is neither a bounty nor<br \/>\n      a matter of grace depending upon the sweet will of the employer.<br \/>\n      Therefore, the Apex Court held as follows.\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>           &#8220;Proceeding further, this Court observed that where all<br \/>\n           relevant considerations are the same, persons holding<br \/>\n           identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of<br \/>\n           their  pay    merely  because     they   belong   to  different<br \/>\n           departments. If that cannot be done when they are in service,<br \/>\n           can that be done during their retirement? Expanding this<br \/>\n           principle, one can confidently say that if pensioners form a<br \/>\n           class, their computation cannot be by different formula<br \/>\n           affording unequal treatment solely on the ground that some<br \/>\n           retired earlier and some retired later.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>             8. It may have been possible for the Board to justify a cut<br \/>\n      off date and denial of revised benefits to those retired subsequent<br \/>\n      to the cut off date. Cases involving introduction of new benefits,<br \/>\n      cases where financial constrains are         pleaded are some of the<br \/>\n      instances where cut off date specified have been upheld. But such<br \/>\n      justification is possible only in cases where facts in support thereof<br \/>\n      are adequately pleaded with sufficient supporting material, which<br \/>\n      is totally absent in this case. Having regard to the above, in the<br \/>\n      light of the law thus laid down, I cannot sustain the classification<br \/>\n      attempted by the Board in the impugned provisions. Therefore the<br \/>\n      provision in clause6(1) providing that those who have retired prior<br \/>\n      to 1.8.2006 are eligible to DCRG            limited to Rs.2.80 lakhs,<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C)No. 149 of 2011<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      provision in clause 7.1 that those who have retired after 1.9.2007<br \/>\n      alone will be entitled to 40% of the basic pension    and clause 7.2<br \/>\n      in so far as it provides that those who have retied from 1.7.2003 to<br \/>\n      31.8.2007 are entitled to only 1\/3rd of the pension admissible on<br \/>\n      the pre-revised pay and that they are not entitled to commute 1\/3rd<br \/>\n      of the pension admissible on the revised pay are unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of, quashing<br \/>\n      clauses 6.1,7.1 and 7.2 to the extent it discriminates employees on<br \/>\n      the basis of their date of retirement and directing             the<br \/>\n      respondents to extend the benefit of DCRG and commutation of<br \/>\n      pension uniformly to the petitioners without discrimination on the<br \/>\n      basis of their dates of retirement.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Writ Petitions are disposed of as above.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>I am in agreement with the said            judgment.     Therefore, this writ<\/p>\n<p>petition is also disposed of in terms of that judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                             S. SIRI JAGAN<br \/>\n                                                                   JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>shg\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 149 of 2011(P) 1. A.SREEKUMAR, &#8220;SRUTHI&#8221; INDIRA NAGAR, &#8230; Petitioner 2. MANI.R., VADATHODE, 3. P.S.GOPALAKRISHNA IYER, KARTHIKA, 4. C.KRISHNAN, D&amp;D NIVAS, VADATHODE, 5. RAJAMANI.P., RAMLATH HOUSE, VADATHODE, Vs 1. THE KERALA STATE [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18833","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - 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\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-08T20:14:33+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\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T20:14:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1202,\"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\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\",\"name\":\"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T20:14:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - 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\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-08T20:14:33+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\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011","datePublished":"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T20:14:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011"},"wordCount":1202,"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\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011","name":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 4 January, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-01-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T20:14:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-sreekumar-vs-the-kerala-state-electricity-on-4-january-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.Sreekumar vs The Kerala State Electricity &#8230; on 4 January, 2011"}]},{"@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\/18833","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=18833"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18833\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18833"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18833"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18833"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}