{"id":235804,"date":"2009-06-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009"},"modified":"2016-06-14T20:41:25","modified_gmt":"2016-06-14T15:11:25","slug":"kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 28843 of 2005(H)\n\n\n1. KUNJIRAMAN,S\/O.KRISHNAN,AGED 49\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. RAGHAVAN,S\/O.POTHAYAN,AGED 47 YEARS\n3. VELLAN,S\/O.SELVAN,AGED 54 YEARS,\n4. VASUDEVAN,S\/O.CHINNU,AGED 47 YEARS\n5. SREEDHARAN,S\/O.THOLAN,AGED 51 YEARS,\n6. BHASKARAN,S\/O.KUNJIRAMAN,AGED 51 YEARS,\n7. ANANTHAN,S\/O.ARAMBA,AGED 48 YEARS,\n8. KESAVAN,S\/O.KARIYAN,AGED 56 YEARS,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. POOKKOT GIRIJAN COLLECTIVE FARMING\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,POOKKOTT\n\n3. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY GOVERNMENT\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.P.JACOB\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :15\/06\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.\n                     ================\n                 W.P.(C) NOs. 28843 OF 2005\n                        & 24082 OF 2007\n                =====================\n\n            Dated this the 15th day of June, 2009\n\n                          J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The issues raised in the writ petitions are common and I<\/p>\n
shall be referring to the facts as stated in WP(C) No.24082\/07.<\/p>\n
      2.   Petitioners were employees of the Pookkot Girijan<\/p>\n
Collective Farming Co-operative Society, Pookkot, Wayanadu, a<\/p>\n
society administered and controlled by the 1st respondent.        It<\/p>\n
would appear from the pleadings that consequent on the abolition<\/p>\n
of bonded labour system in Kerala, the Government of Kerala had<\/p>\n
established a tribal collective farm at Pookkot in 1979 to<\/p>\n
rehabilitate a section of the freeded bonded labour. The Pookkot<\/p>\n
Tribal Collective Farming Co-operative Society (‘society’ for short)<\/p>\n
was also formed for the effective management of the project.<\/p>\n
      3.   Right from the inception, society was incurring losses<\/p>\n
and finally the General Body Meeting of the society resolved to<\/p>\n
wind up the society w.e.f. 8\/5\/2003.         Ext.P1 is the scheme<\/p>\n
formulated by the 1st respondent providing for the benefits that<\/p>\n
are to be paid to the employees who are retrenched.            This<\/p>\n
interalia provides that retrenchment compensation shall be paid<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                                :2 :<\/span><\/p>\n
for every completed period of service upto May 2003.<\/p>\n
Complaining that the scheme was not implemented, a writ<\/p>\n
petition was filed before this Court as WP(C) No.19777\/04. That<\/p>\n
writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment dated 26th of<\/p>\n
July, 2004 recording the submission of the learned Government<\/p>\n
Pleader that 50% of the amount due under Ext.P1 has already<\/p>\n
been paid.    Parties are in agreement that such payment was<\/p>\n
made on 30\/6\/2004.      In Ext.P2 judgment, the submission that<\/p>\n
further payments will also be made was also recorded.<\/p>\n
      4.   According to the petitioners, during this period, despite<\/p>\n
the resolution to wind up the society and the partial payment of<\/p>\n
retrenchment compensation, they continued in service.          It is<\/p>\n
stated that they were also paid salary till December, 2003. As<\/p>\n
they were continuing in service even beyond December 2003,<\/p>\n
they represented to the Government for wages for the<\/p>\n
subsequent period. It is stated that the Government therefore<\/p>\n
called for a report from the 4th respondent. Ext.P3 is the letter<\/p>\n
given by the 4th respondent to the Government suggesting inter<\/p>\n
alia that employees were continuing in service. Even, during this<\/p>\n
period, balance 50% was remaining unpaid and therefore WP(C)<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                                 :3 :<\/span><\/p>\n
No.4490\/05 was filed before this Court. That writ petition was<\/p>\n
disposed of by Ext.P4 judgment directing that the balance amount<\/p>\n
shall be paid within 3 months. Petitioners are referring to Ext.P5,<\/p>\n
which according to the petitioners show the balance amount that<\/p>\n
was due.\n<\/p>\n
      5.   It is stated that on account of the non compliance with<\/p>\n
Ext.P4 judgment, contempt of court case was filed as COC<\/p>\n
No.693\/05 resulting in Ext.P6, where the respondents were<\/p>\n
directed to see that the petitioners were paid for the actual days<\/p>\n
they worked.     It is stated that accordingly, the 1st respondent<\/p>\n
passed Ext.P7 and para 9 of which reads as under:<\/p>\n
         Government have examined whole matter in detail
\n         and found that the service of the employees of the
\n         society stood terminated with effect from 8.5.2003,
\n         vide the proceedings read as the sixth paper above
\n         and as reported by the District Collector, Wayanadu
\n         and Chairman of the Pookkot Girijan Collective
\n         Farming Co-operative Society vide the letter read as
\n         the tenth     paper above,   that there    were  no
\n         circumstances for the employees of the society to
\n         work beyond 8.5.2003.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      6.   It is this order which is under challenge and order for<\/p>\n
payment of salary is also sought for. A reading of para 9 of Ext.P7<\/p>\n
gives the impression that the 1st respondent has negatived the<\/p>\n
petitioners claim for wages beyond 8\/5\/2003 on the ground that<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                                 :4 :<\/span><\/p>\n
the petitioners have not actually worked in the society.<\/p>\n
Petitioners submit that it was by Ext.P10 dated 13\/5\/2005, their<\/p>\n
services were ordered to be terminated w.e.f. 8\/5\/2003.       It is<\/p>\n
stated that Ext.P10 itself show that the petitioners have served<\/p>\n
the society subsequent to 8.5.2003. They are also referring to<\/p>\n
Ext.P4 report and also Ext.P11, a notice issued by the Managing<\/p>\n
Director of the Society in this behalf.\n<\/p>\n
      7.   In this writ petition, what the petitioners mainly<\/p>\n
complain is that although they were paid salary upto December,<\/p>\n
2003 despite the fact that their termination was only by Ext.P10,<\/p>\n
they have not been paid wages till May 2005.\n<\/p>\n
      8.   The respondents have filed a counter affidavit.<\/p>\n
According to the respondents, right from the inception, the<\/p>\n
society was incurring heavy loss, as a result of which, the general<\/p>\n
body had resolved to wind up the society w.e.f. 8\/5\/2003. It is<\/p>\n
stated  that   this necessitated      the formation  of      Ext.P1<\/p>\n
retrenchment scheme and that 50% of the benefits of the scheme<\/p>\n
were extended to the workers on 30\/6\/2004 and the balance 50%<\/p>\n
was paid in June, 2005. It is stated that Ext.P1 contemplated<\/p>\n
retrenchment of the employees w.e.f. May 2003 and that they<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                                :5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
had no occasion to work in the society thereafter. It is also stated<\/p>\n
that the District Collector, Wynad who was the Chairman of the<\/p>\n
Society, had reported to the Government that there were no<\/p>\n
circumstances for the employees of the society to work beyond<\/p>\n
8.5.2003. It is stated that the claim of the petitioners that they<\/p>\n
were attending office after 8.5.2003 is baseless and that the<\/p>\n
respondents had issued no such instructions. Counter would also<\/p>\n
suggest that the Managing Director and the then Secretary of the<\/p>\n
Society   are hand in glove with the petitioner to sustain this<\/p>\n
unjustified claim.\n<\/p>\n
     9.    Similar is the claim raised by the petitioners in WP(C)<\/p>\n
No.28843\/05, who were also employees of the society itself.<\/p>\n
     10. The controversy in these writ petitions can therefore be<\/p>\n
seen to be for wages for the period subsequent to December<\/p>\n
2003 till May 2005. Admittedly, the employees are retrenched<\/p>\n
workmen of the society. The scheme for retrenchment formulated<\/p>\n
by the Government is Ext.P1. The scheme contemplates payment<\/p>\n
of retrenched compensation taking wages in May 2003 and<\/p>\n
quantification of the benefits on that basis. Although Ext.P1 is<\/p>\n
dated 15\/6\/2004, the amount due to the workmen were quantified<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                               :6 :<\/span><\/p>\n
and 50% thereof was paid on 30\/6\/2004 and the balance 50% in<\/p>\n
3\/6\/2005. These averments were accepted and there is no<\/p>\n
challenge to the provisions of Ext.P1 scheme. Two things are to<\/p>\n
be noticed here.    One is that Ext.P1 contemplated reckonable<\/p>\n
service only till May 2003 and consequently at least technically<\/p>\n
retrenchment came into force from May, 2003. Once the factum<\/p>\n
of retrenchment is accepted from May, 2003, there cannot be a<\/p>\n
claim for employment thereafter unless the person retrenched is<\/p>\n
reemployed. There is no such case here.        If that be so, the<\/p>\n
entitlement of the petitioners and the other employees of the<\/p>\n
society will have to be governed by the terms of Ext.P1 and is<\/p>\n
only upto May 2003.\n<\/p>\n
      11. The benefits of Ext.P1 have been paid, though in two<\/p>\n
instalments. If that be so, the employees in question who were<\/p>\n
retrenched as per Ext.P1 scheme, having been paid the amount<\/p>\n
due under Ext.P1, cannot claim anything more than what they<\/p>\n
have been paid and accepted without protest.<\/p>\n
      12. True, by Ext.P10 dated 13\/5\/2005, their services were<\/p>\n
terminated w.e.f. 8\/5\/2003. On this basis, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioners contend that for the period upto 13\/5\/2005, they are<\/p>\n
WPC 28843\/05 & 24082\/07
\n                                 :7 :<\/span><\/p>\n
entitled to be paid wages. In my view, an employee who accepts<\/p>\n
the factum of retrenchment on the basis of Ext.P1 scheme cannot<\/p>\n
claim that the employer employee relationship continued<\/p>\n
thereafter and therefore, even if Ext.P10 was not issued, the<\/p>\n
situation would not have been different. The fact that Ext.P10<\/p>\n
was issued will not in any manner improve the case of the<\/p>\n
petitioners for wages beyond the period , May 2003. I am not<\/p>\n
persuaded to grant any relief.\n<\/p>\n
      Writ petitions fail and are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                       ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
\nRp<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 28843 of 2005(H) 1. KUNJIRAMAN,S\/O.KRISHNAN,AGED 49 … Petitioner 2. RAGHAVAN,S\/O.POTHAYAN,AGED 47 YEARS 3. VELLAN,S\/O.SELVAN,AGED 54 YEARS, 4. VASUDEVAN,S\/O.CHINNU,AGED 47 YEARS 5. SREEDHARAN,S\/O.THOLAN,AGED 51 YEARS, 6. BHASKARAN,S\/O.KUNJIRAMAN,AGED 51 YEARS, 7. ANANTHAN,S\/O.ARAMBA,AGED 48 YEARS, 8. […]<\/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-235804","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - 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\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1283,\"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\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - 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\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009"},"wordCount":1283,"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\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009","name":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective ... on 15 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-14T15:11:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjiraman-vs-pookkot-girijan-collective-on-15-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kunjiraman vs Pookkot Girijan Collective … on 15 June, 2009"}]},{"@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\/235804","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=235804"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235804\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235804"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235804"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235804"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}