{"id":211526,"date":"2011-04-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011"},"modified":"2018-12-18T04:56:41","modified_gmt":"2018-12-17T23:26:41","slug":"v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","title":{"rendered":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 19\/04\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN\n\nW.P.(MD)No.3421 of 2011\n\nV.Rajamani\t\t\t\t...\tPetitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.The District Collector,\n  Pudukkottai District,\n  Pudukkottai.\n\n2.The Tahsildar,\n  Aranthangi,\n  Pudukkottai District.\n\n3.The Revenue Inspector,\n  Tahsildar Office,\n  Aranthangi,\n  Pudukkottai District.\t\t\t...\tRespondents\n\nPrayer\n\nWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to consider\nthe petitioner's representation dated 16.06.2009 requesting him to surrender the\nlands in Survey No.290\/7 to an extent of 67 cents and in Survey No.335\/1 to an\nextent of 45 cents, Arasarkulam West Village, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District,\nto the petitioner within a time limit fixed by this Hon'ble Court.\n\n!For Petitioner\t...\tM\/s.T.K.Gopalan\n^For Respondents...\tMr.K.Balasubramanian\n\t\t        Additional Government Pleader\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe case of the petitioner is that his father borrowed a loan of Rs.500\/-<br \/>\nfrom the Government under the Cashew Development Scheme in order to raise cashew<br \/>\ngarden in his land and according to the scheme, he has to repay the loan after<br \/>\nfive years at the beginning of the sixth year, in five annual installments with<br \/>\nan interest at the rate of 5% per annum.  The petitioner&#8217;s father could not<br \/>\nrepay the amount.  As the amount was not repaid, the Revenue Inspector,<br \/>\nArasarkulam, has taken over the land and brought this property for public<br \/>\nauction on 18.07.1973.  As there were no bidders, the property was taken over by<br \/>\nthe Government and the Revenue Inspector, Arasarkulam, himself bought the land<br \/>\nin favour of the Government on 18.07.1973.  Subsequently, the Revenue Divisional<br \/>\nOfficer, Pattukkottai, in his order dated 06.12.1973, confirmed the sale.<br \/>\nThereafter, the patta standing in the name of the petitioner&#8217;s father was also<br \/>\ncancelled and an extent of 67 cents in Survey No.290\/7 and an extent of 45 cents<br \/>\nin Survey No.335\/1 have been declared as Government lands.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. After the demise of his father, he was not aware of the said<br \/>\nproceedings and therefore, he made a representation only in the year 2004<br \/>\nrequesting the third respondent to hand over the lands which were taken over by<br \/>\nthe Government, as he is ready and willing to repay the amount to the<br \/>\nGovernment.  Subsequently, as per the representation, the District Collector,<br \/>\nPudukkottai District, vide  proceedings dated 11.08.2004, has directed the<br \/>\nsecond respondent to conduct an enquiry and submit a report on the basis of the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s representation. Subsequently, the petitioner has remitted an amount<br \/>\nof Rs.2356.25 into the Treasury on 28.03.2008 and obtained No Due Certificate on<br \/>\n11.04.2008.  Thereafter, he made a representation on 16.06.2009 to take<br \/>\nnecessary steps to hand over the lands to him and till date, the lands in<br \/>\nquestion have not been handed over to him by the third respondent.  Therefore,<br \/>\nhe has come forward with the present petition seeking a mandamus directing the<br \/>\nthird respondent to consider his representation dated 16.06.2009 requesting him<br \/>\nto surrender the lands to an extent of 67 cents in Survey No.290\/7 and an extent<br \/>\nof 45 cents in Survey No.335\/1.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. When the matter was posted for admission, the learned Additional<br \/>\nGovernment Advocate took time to produce some documents relating to the enquiry<br \/>\nconducted.  It is clear that the petitioner&#8217;s father who obtained loan long back<br \/>\nin the year 1962, could not repay the same and ultimately, the land itself<br \/>\nvested with the Government after it was brought for sale.  The sale was<br \/>\nconfirmed as early as on 06.12.1973 and the first representation was made by the<br \/>\npetitioner on 05.05.2004.  There is no record to show what has transpired during<br \/>\nthe interregnum period viz., from 1973 to 2004.  When the first representation<br \/>\nwas made to the first respondent on 05.05.2004, the first respondent vide his<br \/>\nproceedings dated 11.08.2004, had directed the second respondent to conduct an<br \/>\nenquiry and submit a report to the first respondent, no record is produced<br \/>\ninsofar as to the conduct of enquiry or any orders passed pursuant to his<br \/>\ndirection.  After that, all of a sudden, the petitioner without any reference to<br \/>\nany order, has deposited a sum of Rs.2,356.25 on 28.03.2008 viz., four years<br \/>\nafter his first representation and the direction to conduct enquiry and based on<br \/>\nthis, the Tahsildar, Aranthangi, has issued No Due Certificate to the effect<br \/>\nthat the loan obtained in CDL No.10\/61-62 and CDL No.2\/62-63 has been paid and<br \/>\nthere is no due.  Here also, no reference has been made as to how this amount<br \/>\nwas recovered, how the amount was arrived at and what was the enquiry<br \/>\nproceedings.  Now, based on such certificate, curiously, a representation is<br \/>\nmade to the authority concerned to re-deliver the land which was taken over by<br \/>\nthe Government way back in the year 1973 and that too, an extent of 1 acre 12<br \/>\ncents.  Though the application seems to be an innocuous application to consider<br \/>\nthe representation, the net result of the representation is to re-deliver the<br \/>\nland which was taken over by the Government way back in the year 1973 without<br \/>\nany enquiry at all.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. In this connection, it is worthwhile to mention a Division Bench<br \/>\ndecision of this Court in M.Ingaci Vs. The Commissioner, Devakottai &amp; Others,<br \/>\nreported in 2010-2-L.W.785, to which I was a party.  In the said judgment, we<br \/>\nhave culled out the circumstances as to when a Mandamus can be given and on what<br \/>\noccasions, the innocuous prayer to consider and pass orders on representations<br \/>\nleads to drastic consequences. Unfortunately, in spite of the ruling passed,<br \/>\nthis kind of frivolous petitions are being filed in huge numbers, time and<br \/>\nagain.  The Supreme Court in the case of A.P.SRTC Vs. G.Srinivas Reddy, reported<br \/>\nin (2006) 3 SCC 674 = 2006-3-L.W.170,  had observed as follows:-<br \/>\n&#8220;19. There are also several instances where unscrupulous petitioners with the<br \/>\nconnivance of &#8220;pliable&#8221; authorities have misused the direction &#8220;to consider&#8221;<br \/>\nissued by court. We may illustrate by an example. A claim, which is stale, time-<br \/>\nbarred or untenable, is put forth in the form of a representation. On the ground<br \/>\nthat the authority has not disposed of the representation within a reasonable<br \/>\ntime, the person making the representation approaches the High Court with an<br \/>\ninnocuous prayer to direct the authority to &#8220;consider&#8221; and dispose of the<br \/>\nrepresentation. When the court disposes of the petition with a direction to<br \/>\n&#8220;consider&#8221;, the authority grants the relief, taking shelter under the order of<br \/>\nthe court directing him to &#8220;consider&#8221; the grant of relief. Instances are also<br \/>\nnot wanting where authorities, unfamiliar with the process and practice relating<br \/>\nto writ proceedings and the nuances of judicial review, have interpreted or<br \/>\nunderstood the order &#8220;to consider&#8221; as directing grant of relief sought in the<br \/>\nrepresentation and consequently granting reliefs which otherwise could not have<br \/>\nbeen granted. Thus, action of the authorities granting undeserving relief, in<br \/>\npursuance of orders to &#8220;consider&#8221;, may be on account of ignorance, or on account<br \/>\nof bona fide belief that they should grant relief in view of the court&#8217;s<br \/>\ndirection to &#8220;consider&#8221; the claim, or on account of collusion\/connivance between<br \/>\nthe person making the representation and the authority deciding it.<br \/>\nRepresentations of daily-wagers seeking regularisation\/absorption into regular<br \/>\nservice is a species of cases, where there has been a large-scale misuse of the<br \/>\norders &#8220;to consider&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, considering that the petitioner now wants to revive the stale claim<br \/>\nwhich was made way back in the year 1973 merely because he has deposited a sum<br \/>\nof Rs.2356.25 into the Government Treasury without any order, the mandamus<br \/>\nsought for re-delivery of the property itself cannot be given.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tUnder those circumstances, the writ petition is not maintainable and the<br \/>\nsame is dismissed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>srm<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The District Collector,<br \/>\n  Pudukkottai District,<br \/>\n  Pudukkottai.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Tahsildar,<br \/>\n  Aranthangi,<br \/>\n  Pudukkottai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Revenue Inspector,<br \/>\n  Tahsildar Office,<br \/>\n  Aranthangi,<br \/>\n  Pudukkottai District.\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19\/04\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD)No.3421 of 2011 V.Rajamani &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai. 2.The Tahsildar, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. 3.The Revenue Inspector, Tahsildar Office, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. &#8230; Respondents [&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-211526","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>V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 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\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-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=\"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-17T23:26:41+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\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-17T23:26:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1159,\"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\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\",\"name\":\"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-17T23:26:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 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":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 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\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-17T23:26:41+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\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011","datePublished":"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-17T23:26:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011"},"wordCount":1159,"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\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011","name":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-04-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-17T23:26:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-rajamani-vs-the-district-collector-on-19-april-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.Rajamani vs The District Collector on 19 April, 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\/211526","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=211526"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211526\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}