{"id":202336,"date":"2008-09-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-07-05T12:56:39","modified_gmt":"2018-07-05T07:26:39","slug":"the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWA.No. 509 of 2008()\n\n\n1. THE MANAGER, S.V.M.M.HIGH SCHOOL,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. N.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n\n3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION),\n\n4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.ALI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :18\/09\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n         J.B.Koshy & K.P.Balachandran, JJ.\n         ---------------------------------\n                W.A.No.509 of 2008\n         ---------------------------------\n\n                     JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Koshy, J.\n<\/p>\n
    The  appellant  is  the  Manager  of  an  Aided<\/p>\n
School.  A vacancy of Headmaster arose on 1.4.1993<\/p>\n
consequent on retirement of the then Headmaster.<\/p>\n
The post of Headmaster was not filled up and a<\/p>\n
request was made to give extension to the retired<\/p>\n
Headmaster. While the said request was pending, the<\/p>\n
senior   most   teacher   was   given   charge   as<\/p>\n
Headmistress pending decision of the Government.<\/p>\n
That request was declined by the Government on<\/p>\n
12.4.1994. The Manager appointed one Meenakshi Amma<\/p>\n
as the Headmistress. According to the Manager, she<\/p>\n
was the senior most qualified claimant to that<\/p>\n
post.  The writ petitioner, the first respondent in<\/p>\n
the writ appeal questioned the appointment of above<\/p>\n
Meenakshi Amma as Headmistress and according to<\/p>\n
him, he ought to have been appointed in that<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08               2<\/span><\/p>\n
retiral vacancy that arose on 1.4.1993.       Even<\/p>\n
though his claim was accepted by the educational<\/p>\n
authorities, by Exhibit P4, Government directed to<\/p>\n
approve the appointment of Meenakshi Amma as the<\/p>\n
Headmistress of the School and Meenakshi Amma’s<\/p>\n
appointment  was  approved  as  per   Exhibit  P5.<\/p>\n
Thereafter, the writ petitioner challenged Exhibit<\/p>\n
P4, which resulted in Exhibit P6 judgment dated<\/p>\n
23.8.2000. The dispute arose because the Manager<\/p>\n
was under the impression that a Language teacher<\/p>\n
cannot be appointed as the Headmaster and the writ<\/p>\n
petitioner was a Language teacher, even though he<\/p>\n
was a graduate teacher.  The learned single Judge,<\/p>\n
by judgment dated 23.8.2000, held that the writ<\/p>\n
petitioner  was  qualified  to  be   appointed  as<\/p>\n
Headmaster in the vacancy which arose on 1.4.1993.<\/p>\n
Since appointment of the petitioner was delayed<\/p>\n
Rs.10,000\/-  was  also   granted  as  cost   while<\/p>\n
disposing  of  the   writ  petition.  The   fourth<\/p>\n
respondent approached the Honourable Supreme Court<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
filing SLP. By Exhibit P13 order dated 2.8.2002 SLP<\/p>\n
was disposed of with the following directions:<\/p>\n
         “It is submitted by the learned
\n         senior counsel for the petitioner
\n         that  Respondent  No.5  has   since
\n         retired, therefore, the cause of
\n         action  does not   survive.  Hence,
\n         SLPs   have   become   infructuous.
\n         However, we make it clear that in
\n         future,  the appointment   will  be
\n         made in accordance with the Rules.
\n         The  special leave   petitions  are
\n         disposed of.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     2.    Meenakshi Amma retired from service on<\/p>\n
31.5.2002.   Thereafter,  the  writ  petitioner was<\/p>\n
appointed on 19.10.2002. On retirement of Meenakshi<\/p>\n
Amma, in between, another teacher was appointed as<\/p>\n
the Headmistress.   According to the Manager, on the<\/p>\n
basis of the directions of this Court only another<\/p>\n
teacher was appointed whose appointment was also<\/p>\n
approved. The petitioner filed the present writ<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                4<\/span><\/p>\n
petition contending that he is entitled to get<\/p>\n
salary with effect from 1.4.1993. His claim for<\/p>\n
salary was declined by the DEO by Exhibit P19 order<\/p>\n
and that was challenged before this Court and the<\/p>\n
learned single Judge directed to pay salary to the<\/p>\n
petitioner from 1.4.1993 onwards and directed the<\/p>\n
Government to recover the amount from the Manager<\/p>\n
in view of Chapter III Rule 7(4) KER.   As per the<\/p>\n
above Rule, in case the Manager commits serious<\/p>\n
irregularities   causing  monetary  loss   to   the<\/p>\n
teachers\/Government,  the loss  sustained  to  the<\/p>\n
teachers\/Government should be recovered from the<\/p>\n
Manager   under  the  provisions  of  the   Revenue<\/p>\n
Recovery Act as if it is an arrear of public<\/p>\n
revenue due on land.   In various decisions of this<\/p>\n
Court right of the Government to recover such loss<\/p>\n
and entitlement of salary to the teachers who were<\/p>\n
illegally   denied  appointment  were   reiterated.<\/p>\n
Those decisions were also quoted in the impugned<\/p>\n
judgment.\n<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
     3.   The   question  is   whether  any   patent<\/p>\n
illegality was committed by the Manager and whether<\/p>\n
the first respondent is entitled to get salary from<\/p>\n
1.4.1993 onwards.     Proceedings and various writ<\/p>\n
petitions filed show that the appellant Manager was<\/p>\n
contesting the right of the first respondent to<\/p>\n
become a Headmaster bona fidely as he was under the<\/p>\n
impression    that  he   cannot   be  appointed   as<\/p>\n
Headmaster being a Language teacher.   In any event,<\/p>\n
in view of Exhibit P4 order of the Government, it<\/p>\n
cannot be stated that he had acted illegally in<\/p>\n
appointing   Meenakshi  Amma  as  the  Headmistress.<\/p>\n
Exhibit   P4  order  of   the  Government  reads  as<\/p>\n
follows:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
         “I am to forward herewith a copy of
\n         the representation 1st cited and to
\n         direct you to approve the appointment
\n         of Smt.Meenakshi Amma as Headmistress
\n         with effect from 14.4.1994 subject to
\n         decision in O.P.No.4436\/94\/HC filed
\n         by  Sri.N.Radhakrishnan   Nair,   HSA<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
         (Hindi) as there is no stay in the
\n         O.P. or any interim direction of the
\n         Honourable High Court of Kerala.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Only    after  Exhibit  P4  order, Meenakshi Amma’s<\/p>\n
appointment was regularised by Exhibit P5.  We also<\/p>\n
note that during all these periods, Meenakshi Amma<\/p>\n
was working as Headmistress and the writ petitioner<\/p>\n
was working only as a teacher. But, by Exhibit P6<\/p>\n
judgment, learned single Judge positively directed<\/p>\n
that    the  first  respondent was  entitled to  be<\/p>\n
appointed as Headmaster with effect from 1.4.1993.<\/p>\n
The directions in Exhibit P6 judgment were very<\/p>\n
clear. The Manager ought to have appointed the<\/p>\n
first respondent at least after Exhibit P6 judgment<\/p>\n
of the learned single Judge dated 23.8.2000.   Even<\/p>\n
though it was appealed against, no stay was granted<\/p>\n
and the appeal was dismissed on 19.10.2000. The<\/p>\n
Honourable Supreme Court admitted the SLP on a<\/p>\n
limited ground and did not grant stay of Exhibit P6<\/p>\n
judgment, even though contempt proceedings were<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                7<\/span><\/p>\n
only stayed.  In these set of facts, we are of the<\/p>\n
opinion that the writ petitioner will be entitled<\/p>\n
to get all the service benefits, except salary with<\/p>\n
effect from 1.4.1993 and he will be entitled to<\/p>\n
salary with effect from Exhibit P6 judgment dated<\/p>\n
23.8.2000, wherein, a positive direction was issued<\/p>\n
by this Court to appoint him as the Headmaster.<\/p>\n
He was denied promotion for no fault of his at<\/p>\n
least after 23.8.2000. The monetary loss caused to<\/p>\n
the petitioner after 23.8.2000 has to be reimbursed<\/p>\n
by the appellant. In the above circumstances, we<\/p>\n
are of the view that the writ petitioner need be<\/p>\n
given notional promotion with service benefits with<\/p>\n
effect from 1.4.1993, but will be entitled to  get<\/p>\n
salary only from 23.8.2000. He is not entitled to<\/p>\n
get   salary for  the  periods  from  1.4.1993   to<\/p>\n
23.8.2000, as during the above periods Meenaskhi<\/p>\n
Amma was working as Headmistress on the basis of<\/p>\n
Exhibit P4 order of the Government.    He was also<\/p>\n
not functioning as the Headmaster during all the<\/p>\n
WA 509\/08                8<\/span><\/p>\n
above    periods. The  amount  to   be  paid   (the<\/p>\n
difference in salary as teacher and Headmaster) to<\/p>\n
the writ petitioner can be recovered from the<\/p>\n
Manager.   The judgment of the learned single Judge<\/p>\n
is modified accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
     The appeal is allowed in part.      Since the<\/p>\n
appeal is allowed in part the cost of Rs.10,000\/-<\/p>\n
is reduced to Rs.5,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                             (J.B.Koshy, Judge)<\/p>\n
18th September, 2008
\n                          (K.P.Balachandran, Judge)
\ntkv<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WA.No. 509 of 2008() 1. THE MANAGER, S.V.M.M.HIGH SCHOOL, … Petitioner Vs 1. N.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, … Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, For Petitioner […]<\/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-202336","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - 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\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"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\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1110,\"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\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\",\"name\":\"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - 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\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008"},"wordCount":1110,"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\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008","name":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-05T07:26:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-n-radhakrishnan-nair-on-18-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Manager vs N.Radhakrishnan Nair on 18 September, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/202336","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=202336"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202336\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=202336"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=202336"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=202336"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}