{"id":188419,"date":"2006-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006"},"modified":"2018-07-20T06:27:17","modified_gmt":"2018-07-20T00:57:17","slug":"coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","title":{"rendered":"Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\n                     DATED : 19.10.2006\n                              \n                            CORAM\n                              \n           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN\n\n\n          Writ  Petition Nos. 5522 to 5525 of 2003\n                             and\n              W.P.M.p.Nos.5600 to 5603 of 2005\n                           - - - -\n                              \n\n\nCoimbatore District Powerloom Cloth\nDealers' Association rep.by its\nPresident (Reg.No.22\/1983)\nNo.34, Balaji Complex\nBinny  Compound,  Tirupur 641 601.\t   .. \tPetitioner  in\n\t\t\t\t\t\tW.P.5522 of 2003\n\nSomanur Powerloom Cloth\nManufacturers' Association\nrep. by its Secretary\nReg.No.43\/1987\nNo.190\/2, Senthil Nagar\nSomanur-641  668.                    ..       Petitioner  in\n\t\t\t\t\tW.P.No.5523 of 2003\n\nPalladam Taluk Powerloom Textile\nTraders' Association\nrep.by its Secretary\nReg.No.14\/1992\nKongu Velalar Thirumana Mandapam\nTrichy Road,  Palladam 641 664\nCoimbatore    District.            ..       Petitioner    in\n\t\t\t\t\tW.P.No.5524 of 2003\n\nAvinashi Cloth Manufacturers'\nAssociation, rep.by its Secretary\nReg.No.0178\/2001\nNo.42, C.K.Complex West Car Street\nOpp.State  Bank,  Avinashi  641  654    ..    Petitioner  in\n\t\t\t\t\tW.P.No.5525 of 2003\n\n\n\n                              vs\n                              \n\n1. The District Collector\n    Coimbatore District.\n2. The Joint Commissioner of Labour\n   Coimbatore.\n3. The Revenue Divisional Officer\n    Tirupur\n    Coimbatore District.\n4. Kovai Mavatta Koolikku Nesavu\n   Seyyum Visaithari, Urimaiyalar\n   Sangangalin Kootamaippu\n    Regn.No.136\/1991\n    rep.by its President, Power House Road\n    Somanur 641 668, Coimbatore District.    ..  Respondents<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\tin all the W.Ps.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
              For  petitioners       :  Mr.R.Gandhi   Senior\n\t\t\t\t\tCounsel\n\t                                for Mr.R.G.Narendhiran\n\n              For respondents        :  Mr.V.R.Thangavelu  GA for R1\n\t\t\t\t\tto R3\n \t                                Mr. J.Antony Jesus   for R4\n\n\n\t \n        \t        C O M M O N    O R D E R\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
       Writ  petitions  filed  under  Article  226  of   the<\/p>\n
Constitution  of India praying to issue a Writ  of  Mandamus<\/p>\n
forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 from interfering with  the<\/p>\n
rights  of the members of the petitioner Association to  fix<\/p>\n
the  charges  payable for the weaving done on job  works  by<\/p>\n
powerloom owners or in any manner compelling them  to  enter<\/p>\n
into  any settlement\/arrangements for the  purpose of fixing<\/p>\n
uniform  charges  for  the weaving  job  work  as  they  are<\/p>\n
individual  contracts,  entered into between the members  of<\/p>\n
the  petitioner  association  and the  respective  powerloom<\/p>\n
owners.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well<\/p>\n
as for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
      3.  The  facts and circumstances leading to the  above<\/p>\n
writ  petitions and the prayers being similar in  nature,  a<\/p>\n
common order is passed in all these writ petitions.<\/p>\n
      4.The  brief  facts  of the case,  as  stated  by  the<\/p>\n
petitioners, are as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
       It   is   submitted  on  behalf  of  the   petitioner<\/p>\n
associations   that   they  are   registered   associations,<\/p>\n
registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu  Societies<\/p>\n
Registration Act,1975. The associations have been formed for<\/p>\n
the purpose of protecting the interests of its members, more<\/p>\n
particularly,  in  matters  pertaining  to  their   business<\/p>\n
activities,  such  as  price fixation  and  marketing.   The<\/p>\n
members  of  the  petitioner  associations  are  traders  or<\/p>\n
manufacturers who purchase yarn from various spinning mills.<\/p>\n
The  yarn  purchased by the members are of two  types  viz.,<\/p>\n
warp  yarn  and weft yarn.  The warp yarn purchased  by  the<\/p>\n
members are handed over to sizing mills, on job work  basis,<\/p>\n
for  the purpose of sizing the warp yarn.  After the  sizing<\/p>\n
process  is  over, the sized warp yarn beams are taken  back<\/p>\n
from  the  sizing  mills and handed over  to  the  powerloom<\/p>\n
owners,  along with weft yarn, for being  weaved  into  grey<\/p>\n
fabrics.  The powerloom owners are the members of the fourth<\/p>\n
respondent  association carrying on the process of  weaving,<\/p>\n
on  job  work basis, from the traders and manufacturers  who<\/p>\n
are  members  of the petitioner federation. The  sized  warp<\/p>\n
yarn  and  the  weft yarn are properties of  the  respective<\/p>\n
members of the petitioner federation, which are handed  over<\/p>\n
to  the  powerlooms only for the purpose  of  weaving.   The<\/p>\n
ownership  of the yarn continues to remain with the  members<\/p>\n
of  the petitioner federation and the powerlooms are paid on<\/p>\n
job  work  basis, depending upon the nature  of  the  fabric<\/p>\n
which has to be weaved.  Thus, the activities of the members<\/p>\n
of  the  petitioner associations are, in effect,  individual<\/p>\n
contracts, purely within the realm of private law field.  No<\/p>\n
governmental  agency  can exercise  any  control  over  such<\/p>\n
individual  contracts  given for  carrying  out  job  works.<\/p>\n
Since   the   spinning  mills,  including  the  Co-operative<\/p>\n
spinning mills, in the state of Tamil Nadu have been  facing<\/p>\n
a  severe  recession, they were unable  to  pay  the  cotton<\/p>\n
suppliers  and  the  government  was  compelled   to   issue<\/p>\n
notifications  under the various enactments to  protect  the<\/p>\n
spinning  mills from being penalized for non-fulfillment  of<\/p>\n
their  contractual  obligations.  The  price  of  yarn   was<\/p>\n
fluctuating  and consequently, the price fixed for  the  job<\/p>\n
work,  such  as  sizing  or weaving,  was  also  fluctuating<\/p>\n
depending upon market conditions.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      5.  It  is submitted that some of the members  of  the<\/p>\n
fourth  respondent  association, who are  powerloom  owners,<\/p>\n
have  also  conducted  trading and manufacturing  activities<\/p>\n
like that of the members of the petitioner associations  and<\/p>\n
therefore,  the  Powerloom Owners cannot be termed  as  work<\/p>\n
force  and  none  of  the labour welfare legislations  would<\/p>\n
apply to them, including the Industrial Disputes Act,1947.<\/p>\n
      6.  It  is  stated  that  the members  of  the  fourth<\/p>\n
respondent  association had compelled  the  members  of  the<\/p>\n
petitioner association to appear before the first respondent<\/p>\n
for  the purpose of arriving at a settlement, as regards the<\/p>\n
charges  payable  for  the weaving activities  done  by  the<\/p>\n
powerloom owners.  Even though the respondents 1 to  3  have<\/p>\n
no  jurisdiction  to interfere or having  any  control  with<\/p>\n
regard  to  the individual contracts, the first  respondent,<\/p>\n
unilaterally,  by  his  proceedings, dated  14.02.2000,  had<\/p>\n
ordered that the members of the petitioner associations have<\/p>\n
to  pay  18%  increased charges and in  respect  of  certain<\/p>\n
categories  of  fibres the charges have to be  paid  at  the<\/p>\n
increased  rate of 20%.   The said proceedings of the  first<\/p>\n
respondent is patently without jurisdiction.  The members of<\/p>\n
the petitioner associations deal in various types of fabrics<\/p>\n
and  they have individual tie-ups with powerloom owners  and<\/p>\n
each of such job works entrusted to the powerloom owners  is<\/p>\n
an  individual  contract and the rates are  mutually  agreed<\/p>\n
upon between the members of the petitioner associations  and<\/p>\n
the  powerloom  owners, who are the members  of  the  fourth<\/p>\n
respondent  association. By no stretch of  imagination,  the<\/p>\n
contracts  were  falling within the ambit of the  Industrial<\/p>\n
Disputes   Act,1947,   as   there   is   no   master-servant<\/p>\n
relationship and it is not a matter pertaining to employment<\/p>\n
or  the  terms of employment.  Therefore, the action of  the<\/p>\n
respondents  1  to  3  , in compelling and  threatening  the<\/p>\n
petitioner associations to come for negotiations, is  wholly<\/p>\n
without jurisdiction and is illegal in the eye of law, as it<\/p>\n
would also be contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution  of<\/p>\n
India.   Inspite   of  several  oral  representations,   the<\/p>\n
respondents 1 to 3 and their officials have been  constantly<\/p>\n
threatening the members of the petitioner associations, with<\/p>\n
a  view to compel them to enter into an arrangement with the<\/p>\n
powerlooms  owners.   On  receipt  of  the   letter,   dated<\/p>\n
13.01.2003,  from the fourth respondent, there  is  constant<\/p>\n
official  pressure on the petitioner associations  to  agree<\/p>\n
for  enhanced  rates  for  the job  works.   Therefore,  the<\/p>\n
petitioner associations have been constrained to come before<\/p>\n
this Court by way of filing the writ petitions.<\/p>\n
      7.In  the  counter affidavit filed on  behalf  of  the<\/p>\n
second   respondent  it  has  been  stated   that   as   per<\/p>\n
G.O.Ms.No.106,   dated  25.07.2001,  of   the   Labour   and<\/p>\n
Employment (D2) Department of the Government of Tamil  Nadu,<\/p>\n
the  second  respondent has been appointed  as  one  of  the<\/p>\n
Conciliation  Officers, under Section 4  of  the  Industrial<\/p>\n
Disputes Act,1947, to settle the industrial disputes arising<\/p>\n
in  the  State  of  Tamil Nadu.  The nature of  transactions<\/p>\n
between  the members of the petitioner associations and  the<\/p>\n
members of the fourth respondent association, as well as the<\/p>\n
nature  of  payments made by the petitioner associations  to<\/p>\n
the  members of the fourth respondent association  are  well<\/p>\n
within  the  purview  of the Industrial  Disputes  Act,1947.<\/p>\n
Therefore,  any dispute or difference falling under  Section<\/p>\n
2(K)  of  the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, could  be  dealt<\/p>\n
with by the second respondent, as contemplated by law.   The<\/p>\n
second respondent, as a conciliation officer, is expected to<\/p>\n
function   under  the  authority of the Industrial  Disputes<\/p>\n
Act,1947,  and  under  the  power  vested  in  him  by   the<\/p>\n
provisions of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Disputes Rules,1958.<\/p>\n
The  second respondent has been acting in good faith in  the<\/p>\n
discharge  of  the  functions contemplated  by  law  and  as<\/p>\n
prescribed  by  the  provisions of the  Industrial  Disputes<\/p>\n
Act,1947. The petitioner associations and their members  are<\/p>\n
not  in a position to show as to in what manner and to  what<\/p>\n
extent  such  exercise of powers and duties  by  the  second<\/p>\n
respondent  have  been wrongly exercised against  them.   In<\/p>\n
such  circumstances, the reliefs sought for  in  these  writ<\/p>\n
petitions  cannot  be  granted.  Therefore,  the  petitioner<\/p>\n
associations  and  its  members  cannot  be  taken   to   be<\/p>\n
aggrieved,  at  this stage.  Therefore, the  writ  petitions<\/p>\n
cannot   be  maintained  on  mere  apprehensions   and   the<\/p>\n
respondents  cannot  be  prevented  from  discharging  their<\/p>\n
official duties in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
      8.  On  a  perusal of the records placed  before  this<\/p>\n
Court,  it  is seen that an invitation has been extended  by<\/p>\n
the   communication,  dated  1.3.2000,  to  the   petitioner<\/p>\n
associations to come for talks for a negotiated  settlement,<\/p>\n
with  regard  to the situation that has arisen  due  to  the<\/p>\n
strike in work in the powerloom industry.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       9.   It  is  seen that the sole apprehension  of  the<\/p>\n
members of the petitioner associations is that they will  be<\/p>\n
compelled  to enter into a compromise or a formal settlement<\/p>\n
which  will prejudice their interests.  But there is nothing<\/p>\n
shown by the petitioner associations as to the circumstances<\/p>\n
under which they would be prejudiced and in what manner harm<\/p>\n
would  be  caused  to  them. This Court  normally  does  not<\/p>\n
interfere  with  mere apprehensions and that  too  when  the<\/p>\n
apprehensions  are  with  regard  to  the  action   of   the<\/p>\n
respondents  1  to 3, who are highly ranked and  responsible<\/p>\n
government officials, namely, the District<\/p>\n
                                             M.JAICHANDREN.J
\nCollector, the Joint Commissioner of Labour and the  Revenue<\/p>\n
Divisional   Officer,  Tirupur,   while  discharging   their<\/p>\n
official  duties.   However, it is made clear  that  if  the<\/p>\n
members  of  the petitioner associations have any objections<\/p>\n
or  reservations, with regard to the issues involved in  the<\/p>\n
proposed talks, it will be always open to them to raise them<\/p>\n
at  the relevant point of time, in the manner known to  law.<\/p>\n
Therefore,  in  the said circumstances,  the writ  petitions<\/p>\n
are  dismissed.  In the impleading petitions, no orders  are<\/p>\n
necessary  and  hence,  the impleading  petitions  are  also<\/p>\n
dismissed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
kvsg<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1. The District Collector
\n    Coimbatore District.\n<\/p>\n
2. The Joint Commissioner of Labour
\n   Coimbatore<\/p>\n
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
\n    Tirupur
\n    Coimbatore District.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.10.2006 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition Nos. 5522 to 5525 of 2003 and W.P.M.p.Nos.5600 to 5603 of 2005 – – – – Coimbatore District Powerloom Cloth Dealers’ Association […]<\/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-188419","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCoimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - 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\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Coimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-20T00:57:17+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-20T00:57:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1516,\"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\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\",\"name\":\"Coimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-20T00:57:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Coimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - 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\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Coimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-20T00:57:17+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006","datePublished":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-20T00:57:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006"},"wordCount":1516,"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\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006","name":"Coimbatore District Powerloom ... vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-20T00:57:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coimbatore-district-powerloom-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-october-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Coimbatore District Powerloom … vs The District Collector on 19 October, 2006"}]},{"@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\/188419","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=188419"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188419\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188419"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188419"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188419"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}