{"id":233816,"date":"2007-11-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007"},"modified":"2016-06-16T15:59:08","modified_gmt":"2016-06-16T10:29:08","slug":"pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 06\/11\/2007\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL\n\n\nW.P.(MD)Nos.6519 of 2007,\nW.P.(MD)Nos.6652 of 2007 and\nM.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 1 of 2007\n\n\n\nPasumpon Stores Employees Union,\nSivagangai\nrepresented by its\nSecretary M.Pandi\n9\/5, Pillayar Kovil Street,\nSivagangai.\t\t \t...\tPetitioner in\n\t\t\t\t\tboth the writ petitions\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n1.The District Collector,\n  Collectorate,\n  Sivagangai District.\n\n2.The Joint Registrar,\n  Sivagangai Zone Cooperative Societies,\n  Sivagangai District.\n\n3.The Special Officer,\n  A.1562 Manamadurai Cooperative Stores,\n  Near Gandhi Silai, Manamadurai.\n\n4.The Special Officer,\n  N.N.432, Sivagangai Agriculture Production,\n  Cooperative Sales Sangam,\n  Sathiyamoorthy Street,\n  Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.\n\n5.The Special Officer,\n  Thiruppathur Adriculture Production,\n  Cooperative Sales Sangam, Singampunari,\n  Sivagangai District.\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t... \tRespondents in<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\tboth the writ petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t \tWrit Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,<br \/>\npraying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorari calling for the records<br \/>\npertaining to the impugned  orders in Na.Ka.684\/2006Gen.Rule-1 dated 12.07.2007<br \/>\nissued by the second respondent and Na.Ka.S 1-41306-07 dated 28.07.2007 issued<br \/>\nby the first respondent and quash the same as illegal.\n<\/p>\n<pre>!For Petitioners       \t...\tMr.T.Lajapathi Roy\n\n\n^For RR 1 and 2 \t...\tMr.K.Balasubramanian\n\t\t\t\tAdditional Government Pleader\n\n\n:COMMON ORDER\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t \tWrit petition No.6519 of 2007 is filed by Pasumpon Stores Employees<br \/>\nUnion, Sivagangai seeking writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order in<br \/>\nNa.Ka.684\/2006Gen.Rule-1 dated 12.07.2007 issued by the second respondent and<br \/>\nWrit petition No.6652 of 2007 is filed by the very same Union seeking writ of<br \/>\ncertiorari to quash the impugned order in Na.Ka.S 1-41306-07 dated 28.07.2007<br \/>\nissued by the first respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t2. As both the writ petitions are connected with each other, both<br \/>\nthe writ petitions are taken up for common disposal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t3. The contention of the petitioner Union is as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\ta) The petitioner Union is affiliated to Tamil Nadu Consumer<br \/>\nCooperative Employees Federation. The employees of the petitioner Union are<br \/>\nworking in Sivagangai District Consumer Cooperative Whole Sale Stores,<br \/>\nSivagangai, which came into existence in the year 1992. By the proceedings in<br \/>\nNa.Ka.14105\/94 dated 08.04.1994, Thiruppuvanam Uzhavar Pani Cooperative Union<br \/>\nfunctioning in Sivgangai District was permitted to do self-lifting of the<br \/>\ncommodities from Tamil Nadu Consumer Godown. Such a permission was granted only<br \/>\nafter obtaining consent from the petitioner Union and as a result of which self-<br \/>\nlifting was ordered for ten ration shops under Thiruppuvanam Uzhavar Pani<br \/>\nCooperative Union.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tb. On account of the stable economical position of the stores of the<br \/>\nUnion, the petitioner Union continued the supply of commodities to all the<br \/>\nration shops within the District. While so, the second respondent Joint<br \/>\nRegistrar, Sivagangai Zone Cooperative Societies, Sivagangai District issued the<br \/>\nimpugned order on 12.07.2007 directing self-lifting of essential commodities for<br \/>\nManamadurai Cooperative Stores from Tamil Nadu Consumer Godown.  The order<br \/>\npassed by the Joint Registrar was without any jurisdiction.  The impugned order<br \/>\nwould render the workers jobless. A representation dated 18.07.2007 was sent to<br \/>\nthe second respondent by the Special Officer of the Stores of the petitioner<br \/>\nUnion.  But the decision of the second respondent was not reconsidered. The<br \/>\nfirst respondent, the District Collector, Sivagangai District passed impugned<br \/>\norder in  Na.Ka.S 1-41306-07 dated 28.07.2007. The petitioner Union therefore<br \/>\nseeks for quashing of impugned orders passed by both the first and the second<br \/>\nrespondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t4. In the counter, the respondents have submitted that the<br \/>\npetitioner Union is no way prejudiced by the impugned orders passed by the first<br \/>\nand the second respondents.  The petitioner Union has no locus standi to<br \/>\nchallenge the impugned orders. The fifth respondent Society lifted the goods for<br \/>\ntheir respective stores with the help of Sivagangai District Consumer Co-<br \/>\noperative Wholesale Stores, in other words called lead society from the Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Civil Supplies Godown.  The Co-operative Whole Sale Stores formed in the<br \/>\nyear 1992 have control over 592 fair price shops including 145 direct control<br \/>\nfair price shops. They have earned a huge profit of Rs.1,81,06,286.12\/-.  But<br \/>\nthe third respondent Society has incurred a loss of Rs.8,60,000\/- during the<br \/>\nyear 2005-2006. By the order of the self-liftment, the fifth respondent Society<br \/>\ncan grow well and come out from their loss.  After carefully considering the<br \/>\neconomical growth of the societies concerned, self-liftment was ordered by the<br \/>\nJoint Registrar and consequent order was passed by the Collector. The Registrar<br \/>\nof cooperative Societies has given delegated powers to the second respondent in<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.(2D)-108 and G.O.Ms.No.(2D)-109 Cooperation Food and Consumer<br \/>\nProtection Department dated 31.08.2005.  There is no merit in the writ petitions<br \/>\nfiled by the petitioner Union, it has been contended by the respondents in<br \/>\ntheir counter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit<br \/>\nthat the second respondent Joint Registrar, Sivagangai Zone Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties and the District Collector, Sivagangai District have no authority or<br \/>\njurisdiction to pass the impugned orders under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties Act, 1983. The respondents have not given their anxious thought to the<br \/>\nheavy loss of job, that may occasion to the petitioner Union on account of the<br \/>\nimplementation of the impugned order of self-lifting, passed by both the first<br \/>\nand second respondents. The order of self-lifting will not in any way help the<br \/>\nlink society in improving their fiscal health.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t6. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for<br \/>\nrespondents 1 and 2 would vehemently contend that the second respondent has<br \/>\nauthority to pass the impugned order and the first respondent has just passed on<br \/>\ninstruction to the Tamil Nadu Consumer Godown as per the orders of the second<br \/>\nrespondent. The Sivagangai District Consumer Cooperative Whole Sale Stores,<br \/>\nSivagangai has earned huge profit margin, whereas the society of the respondents<br \/>\nhave incurred heavy loss on account of lack of cost effective measures at the<br \/>\nlink societies. If the link societies are not permitted to adopt self-lifting,<br \/>\nthe employees of the link societies will definitely lose their job, it is<br \/>\nfurther submitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t7. Let us first take up the disputed issue as to whether the second<br \/>\nrespondent has jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. Section 3 of the Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983,(hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the Act&#8217;)<br \/>\nempowers the Government to confer on any officer of the Government by general or<br \/>\nspecial order, all or any of the powers of any Registrar under the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t8. The respondents have produced a copy of the Government Order in<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.(2D)-108 Cooperation Food and Consumer Protection Department dated<br \/>\n31.08.2005 to establish that a notification was issued by the Government of<br \/>\nTamil Nadu conferring powers on the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies all<br \/>\nthe powers of the Registrar under the said Act in respect of any primary or<br \/>\nCentral Cooperative Society, exercising powers conferred by Section 3 of the<br \/>\nAct.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t9. The second respondent, Joint Registrar, Sivagangai Zone<br \/>\ncooperative Societies, Sivagangai District having specifically referred to the<br \/>\ncommunication emanated from the first respondent, Collector and the Deputy<br \/>\nRegistrar, Karaikudi Zone, has considered the financial capacity of the link<br \/>\nsocieties, and having given primary concern for the development of the link<br \/>\nsocieties, passed the impugned order in Na.Ka.684\/2006Gen.Rule-1 dated<br \/>\n12.07.2007 permitting R-75 Thiruppathur Agricultural Producers Cooperative<br \/>\nSociety to self-lift the essential commodities directly from the Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nConsumer Godown in respect of the seven shops run by the said society.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t10. It is found that the second respondent  has been given<br \/>\ndelegation of powers of the Registrar to administer the link societies.<br \/>\nTherefore, the second respondent is well within his competency and jurisdiction<br \/>\nin passing the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t11. Coming to the necessity to pass such impugned order by the<br \/>\nsecond respondent, it is found that the loss occasioned to the link societies<br \/>\nhas caused alarm the mind of the respondents. The second respondent has also<br \/>\nweighed the potential fiscal health of the Sivagangai District Consumer<br \/>\nCooperative whole Sale Stores, Sivagangai District, which has so far undertaken<br \/>\nthe job of transporting the consumer products for the purpose of distribution to<br \/>\nthe link societies and the fiscal ill-health of the link societies before ever<br \/>\npassing such an impugned order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t12. The respondents have found a lopsided growth of the link<br \/>\nsocieties compared to the lead societies.  Further, it is noted that the self-<br \/>\nlifting practice has already been in vogue in some of the link societies.  If<br \/>\nthe fiscal health of the link societies is not taken care of by such radical<br \/>\nsteps, there is imminent danger for the employees of the link society to go out<br \/>\nof job.  The employees of the petitioner Union can very well survive with the<br \/>\nwhopping profit, they have earned so far. The second respondent has rightly<br \/>\npassed the impugned order permitting self-liftment practice in order to save the<br \/>\nlink societies which are already sinking. There is no necessity for the second<br \/>\nrespondent to associate the petitioner Union before ever any decision is taken<br \/>\nto save the link society from its economic ill-health as there is no contractual<br \/>\nor statutory obligation imposed on the shoulder of the respondents. The life<br \/>\nsaving measure taken promptly at the appropriate time by the second respondent<br \/>\nby way of passing the impugned order cannot be faulted with.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t13. After all the first respondent, the District Collector reading<br \/>\nthe impugned order passed by the second respondent has simply given instruction<br \/>\nto the Tamil Nadu Consumer Godown to effect direct supply of essential<br \/>\ncommodities to seven fair price shops coming under the jurisdiction of<br \/>\nThiruppathur Agricultural Producers cooperative Society.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t14. The impugned orders have been passed by the second respondent<br \/>\nwho has been empowered to do so in the best interest of the Link Societies and<br \/>\nthe first respondent who has authority to operationalise the order of the second<br \/>\nrespondent has passed the impugned communication to the Tamil Nadu Consumer<br \/>\nGodown. In view of the above, the claim of the petitioner Union seeking to quash<br \/>\nthe said impugned order is not at all sustainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t15. In the result, the writ petitions in W.P.(MD)Nos.6519 and 6652<br \/>\nof 2007 stand dismissed. There is no order as to costs. Connected MPs are also<br \/>\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>mj<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The District Collector,<br \/>\n  Collectorate,<br \/>\n  Sivagangai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Joint Registrar,<br \/>\n  Sivagangai Zone Cooperative Societies,<br \/>\n  Sivagangai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Special Officer,<br \/>\n  A.1562 Manamadurai Cooperative Stores,<br \/>\n  Near Gandhi Silai, Manamadurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Special Officer,<br \/>\n  N.N.432, Sivagangai Agriculture Production,<br \/>\n  Cooperative Sales Sangam,<br \/>\n  Sathiyamoorthy Street,<br \/>\n  Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The Special Officer,<br \/>\n  Thiruppathur Adriculture Production,<br \/>\n  Cooperative Sales Sangam, Singampunari,<br \/>\n  Sivagangai District.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06\/11\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JEYAPAUL W.P.(MD)Nos.6519 of 2007, W.P.(MD)Nos.6652 of 2007 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 1 of 2007 Pasumpon Stores Employees Union, Sivagangai represented by its Secretary M.Pandi 9\/5, Pillayar [&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-233816","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>Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - 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\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-16T10:29:08+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\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-16T10:29:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1590,\"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\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\",\"name\":\"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-16T10:29:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - 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\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-16T10:29:08+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\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-16T10:29:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007"},"wordCount":1590,"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\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007","name":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-16T10:29:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pasumpon-stores-employees-union-vs-the-district-collector-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pasumpon Stores Employees Union vs The District Collector on 6 November, 2007"}]},{"@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\/233816","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=233816"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233816\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=233816"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=233816"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=233816"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}