{"id":235849,"date":"2007-01-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-01-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007"},"modified":"2015-04-01T09:36:57","modified_gmt":"2015-04-01T04:06:57","slug":"r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","title":{"rendered":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C) No. 33487 of 2005(J)\n\n\n1. R. SURESH KUMAR, RESEARCH ASSISTANT,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES,\n\n3. THE DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN\n\n Dated :30\/01\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                         K.K. DENESAN, J.\n\n\n\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n\n                  W.P.(C) No.33487 OF 2005 J\n\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n\n\n\n               Dated this the 30th January, 2007\n\n\n\n                          J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
     The   petitioner   commenced   service   as   Research<\/p>\n
Assistant,   on   the   advice   of   the   Kerala   Public   Service<\/p>\n
Commission, on 23-1-1999.  In the provisional seniority<\/p>\n
list of Research Assistant he was assigned rank No. 53.\n<\/p>\n
When the seniority list was finalised on 10-5-2002, his<\/p>\n
rank was refixed as 49.\n<\/p>\n
     2.   As   per   the   Kerala   Fisheries   Service   Rules<\/p>\n
issued   in   G.O.(MS)   No.   594\/62\/PD   dated   3-11-1962,<\/p>\n
Inspector   of   Fisheries,   Fish   Cultural   Officers,<\/p>\n
Technical   Assistants,   Fish   Farm   Managers   and   Research<\/p>\n
Assistants   in   the   Kerala   Fisheries   Subordinate   Service<\/p>\n
are   the   feeder   categories   for   recruitment   by   transfer<\/p>\n
to the post of Superintendent Fishermen Training Centre<\/p>\n
(FTC,   for   short).     There   shall   be   a   ratio   of   2:1   for<\/p>\n
recruitment   by   transfer   between   the   categories   of<\/p>\n
Inspector of Fisheries\/Fish Cultural Officers\/Technical<\/p>\n
Assistants\/Fish   Farm   Managers   and   the   category   of<\/p>\n
Research Assistant.\n<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                           -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
     3.   The   petitioner   is   qualified   for   the   post   of<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C   by   acquiring   the   requisite   test<\/p>\n
qualification   and   the   Staff   Training   Course   (STC),   as<\/p>\n
also   satisfactory   completion   of   probation   in   the<\/p>\n
category of Research Assistant.\n<\/p>\n
     4.         Select         list         of         officers               eligible         for<\/p>\n
appointment   to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   for<\/p>\n
the   year   2001   was   prepared   by   the   Departmental<\/p>\n
Promotion            Committee         (Lower)               for         the         Fisheries<\/p>\n
Department in its meeting held on 4-8-2001.  Out of the<\/p>\n
21   officers   whose   cases   were   placed   for   the<\/p>\n
consideration   of   the   D.P.C.,   11   officers   were   excluded<\/p>\n
from   the   purview   of   consideration.     Therefore   in   the<\/p>\n
select   list   published   in   the   Gazette   dated   15-9-2001,<\/p>\n
10   officers  alone  were  included  for  appointment  to  the<\/p>\n
post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.     As   per   the   Special<\/p>\n
Rules   for   the   Kerala   Fisheries   Service,   the   cadre<\/p>\n
strength in the post of Superintendent, F.T.C. shall be<\/p>\n
maintained   in   the   ratio   of   2:1   between   Inspector   of<\/p>\n
Fisheries\/Technical                         Assistants\/Fish                           Cultural<\/p>\n
Officers\/Fish   Farm   Managers   and   Research   Assistants.\n<\/p>\n
Since 11 officers were excluded from the select list as<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
prepared   by   the   D.P.C.,   there   was   practical   difficulty<\/p>\n
in   maintaining   the   ratio   prescribed   by   the   Special<\/p>\n
Rules   while   filling   up   the   then   existing   vacancies   of<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.       Hence,   it   was   decided   to<\/p>\n
revise   the   select   list   before   filling     the   vacancies.\n<\/p>\n
Hence, an ad hoc meeting of the D.P.C. was held on 6-7-\n<\/p>\n
2002.        The   revised   select   list   for   the   post   of<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   for   the   year   2001   prepared   in<\/p>\n
the ad hoc meeting held on 6-7-2002 is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\"1. Sri. S. Jayachandran                     RA category\n\n\n\n2. Sri. K.K. Satheeshkumar                   RA category\n\n\n\n3. Sri. Dinesan Cheruvat                     RA category\n\n\n\n4. Smt. R. Sandhya                           RA category\n\n\n\n5. Sri. O. Vasu.                             IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n6. Sri. Subash Chandra Mohan                 IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n7. Smt. M. Laila Beevi                       RA category\n\n\n\n8. Smt. D. Anithakumari                      IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n9. Sri. P. Amalakumar                        IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n10.Sri. S. Sreekumar                         RA category\n\n\n\n11.Sri. N.K. Venu                            IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n12.Sri. M.J. Kurian                          IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n13.Dr. K.K. Sutharam                         RA category\n\n\nWPC No. 33487\/2005                 -4-<\/span>\n\n\n14.Sri. Abdul Majeed                            IF\/RA category\n\n\n\n15. Sri. S. Gurudas                             IF\/TA category\n\n\n\n16. Smt. R. Sheela                              RA category.\"\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
      5.   The   contentions   of   the   petitioner   may   be<\/p>\n
summarised as follows:   Dr. K.K. Sutharam (Sl. No. 13)<\/p>\n
shown   above   is   admittedly   junior   to   the   petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
Hence,   the   petitioner   is   eligible   to   be   included   in<\/p>\n
Ext. P2 in the place assigned to Dr. K.K. Sutharam.  It<\/p>\n
is   admitted   that   the   omission   to   include   the   name   of<\/p>\n
the   petitioner   in   Ext.   P2   happened   since   the   ‘Notes’<\/p>\n
for   revising   the   select   list   was   processed   before<\/p>\n
issuing the final seniority list of Research Assistant.\n<\/p>\n
Overlooking   the   right   of   the   petitioner   to   get<\/p>\n
promotion   to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   in<\/p>\n
preference to Dr. K.K. Sutharam, Ext. P4 order dated 4-\n<\/p>\n
3-2003   was   issued   promoting   almost   all   those   who   were<\/p>\n
included   in   Ext.   P2   revised   list.     Sl.   No.   7   M.   Laila<\/p>\n
Beevi,   Sl.   No.   10   S.   Sreekumar,   Sl.   No.   13   K.K.\n<\/p>\n
Sutharam and Sl. No. 16 R. Sheela, who are included in<\/p>\n
the revised select list for the post of Superintendent,<\/p>\n
F.T.C.   have   been   included   as   Sl.   Nos.   1   to   4<\/span><\/p>\n
respectively in the revised select list for the post of<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                                       -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
Research   Assistant\/Marine   Survey   Officer\/Fresh   Water<\/p>\n
Biologist   vide   Ext.   P2.     The   manner   in   which   the<\/p>\n
aforesaid   persons   have   been   promoted   is   discernible<\/p>\n
from the following portion extracted from Ext. P4:\n<\/p>\n
                  “Smt. M. Laila Beevi, the next person in<\/p>\n
      the select list had already been promoted as<\/p>\n
      Fresh Water Biologist from the select list of<\/p>\n
      Research   Officer\/Marine   Survey   Officer\/Fresh<\/p>\n
      Water Biologist for the year 2001 as per this<\/p>\n
      office   proceedings   order   No.   A2\/15990\/01   dt.<\/p>\n
      1-10-01.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
                  Sri. S. Sreekumar, Dr. K.K. Sutharam and<\/p>\n
      Smt.   R.   Sheela   who   were   included   in   the<\/p>\n
      revised   select   list   of   Fishermen   Training<\/p>\n
      Centre   Superintendent   have   already   been<\/p>\n
      promoted  as   Research   Officer   from   the   select<\/p>\n
      list   of             Research                     Officer\/Marine   Survey<\/p>\n
      Officer\/Fresh   Water   Biologist   for   the   year<\/p>\n
      2001   vide   this   office   proceedings   order   No.<\/p>\n
      A2\/15990\/01   dt.   2-11-02,   6-1-2002   and   4-3-<\/p>\n
      2003   respectively.                            Hence   Smt.   M.   Laila<\/p>\n
      Beevi,   Sri.   S.   Sreekumar,   Dr.   K.K.   Sutharam<\/p>\n
      and   Smt.   R.   Sheela   who   were   included   in   the<\/p>\n
      select   list   of   Superintendent   Fishermen<\/p>\n
      Training   Centre   from   Research   Assistant<\/p>\n
      category need not be posted as Superintendent<\/p>\n
      Fishermen Training Centre.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
                  The   next   person   in   the   select   list   Smt.<\/p>\n
      D.           Anithakumari,                          Technical         Assistant<\/p>\n
      Fishermen   Station   Vizhinjam   is   promoted   to<\/p>\n
      the          cadre            of         Superintendent               Fishermen<\/p>\n
      Training   Centre   and   posted   as   Extension<\/p>\n
      Officer   (Fisheries),   Office   of   the   Deputy<\/p>\n
      Director                      of                   Fisheries            (Zonal)<\/p>\n
      Thiruvananthapuram in the existing vacancy.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     6.     The   question   for   consideration   is   as   to   how<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                   -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
the   omission   to   include   the   petitioner   in   Ext.   P2<\/p>\n
shall   be   supplied   and   as   to   how   and   to   what   extent<\/p>\n
benefits   shall   be   given   to   him   as   a   measure   of<\/p>\n
restoration of the rights lost to him by such omission.\n<\/p>\n
In order to work out the rights and benefits due to the<\/p>\n
petitioner   consequent   to   his   inclusion   in   the   revised<\/p>\n
select list, it is necessary to refer to the occurrence<\/p>\n
of   vacancies  in  the  post  of  Superintendent,  F.T.C.  and<\/p>\n
the equivalent post of Research Officer.\n<\/p>\n
      7.   Sl.   Nos.   1   to   4,   7,   10,   13   and   16   in   Ext.   P2<\/p>\n
revised   list   are   from   the   feeder   category   of   Research<\/p>\n
Assistants.     Others   are   from   other   feeder   categories.\n<\/p>\n
The select list is prepared applying the ratio of 2:1.\n<\/p>\n
Sl.   Nos.   7,   10,   13   and   16   are   included   in   the   select<\/p>\n
list   of   Research   Officer   also.     Relevant   portion   from<\/p>\n
Ext.   P4   quoted   above   shows   that   they   were   promoted   as<\/p>\n
Research         Officers         without         being         promoted         as<\/p>\n
Superintendent, F.T.C.   The above two posts are in the<\/p>\n
same rank and carry the same scale of pay.   Hence, Sl.\n<\/p>\n
Nos.   7,   10,   13   and   16   need   not   be   promoted   as<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   for   appointment   by   transfer   as<\/p>\n
Research Officers.     Sl. Nos. 13 and 16 are admittedly<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                 -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
juniors   to   the   petitioner   in   the   feeder   category   of<\/p>\n
Research Assistant.  Hence, they ought not to have been<\/p>\n
included   in   the   select   list   without   including   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   in   that   list   and   without   assigning   him   a<\/p>\n
higher   rank,   had   the   omission   been   noticed   at   the<\/p>\n
appropriate   time.     It   is   indisputable   that   had   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   been   included   as   Sl.   No.   13   in   Ext.   P2,   he<\/p>\n
would   have   been   promoted   as   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   by<\/p>\n
Ext. P4 order dated 4-3-2003.   Since Sl. Nos. 7 and 10<\/p>\n
in   Ext.  P2  were  already  promoted  as  Research  Officers,<\/p>\n
the   petitioner  would  have  been  promoted  instead  of  Sl.\n<\/p>\n
No. 8 in Ext. P2, by virtue of his rank (Sl. No. 13) in<\/p>\n
Ext.   P2.     However,   the   2nd  respondent-Director   issued<\/p>\n
orders accommodating Smt. D. Anithakumari (Sl. No. 8 in<\/p>\n
Ext. P2) in the post that remained vacant consequent on<\/p>\n
the promotion of Smt. M. Laila Beevi (Sl. No. 7 in Ext.\n<\/p>\n
P2)   as   Research   Officer.     It   is   contended   by   counsel<\/p>\n
for   the   petitioner   that   the   above   action   of   the   2nd<\/p>\n
respondent   is   illegal   and   irregular   because   Sl.   No.   7<\/p>\n
in   Ext.   P2   is   the   slot   meant   for   promoting   a   Research<\/p>\n
Assistant   so   as   to   maintain   the   ratio   of   2:1   between<\/p>\n
the category of Inspectors and the category of Research<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                 -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
Assistants.  As already noticed, Smt. Anithakumari (Sl.\n<\/p>\n
No. 8) was given promotion as Superintendent, F.T.C. as<\/p>\n
per Ext. P4.\n<\/p>\n
     8.   The   petitioner   filed   representations   against<\/p>\n
the   supersession.          When   no   action   was   taken   he<\/p>\n
approached this Court.  As a result of the action taken<\/p>\n
by   the   petitioner   and   the   directions   he   obtained   from<\/p>\n
this Court, a review meeting of the D.P.C. was held on<\/p>\n
13-7-2005   including   the   name   of   the   petitioner   against<\/p>\n
Sl.   No.   13   in   the   same   list   for   the   post   of<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   for   the   year   2001.     Ext.   P8   is<\/p>\n
the notification issued by the Government approving the<\/p>\n
above   select   list.     However,   the   grievance   of   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   for   appropriate   promotion   to   the   post   of<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   and   the   next   higher   post   of<\/p>\n
Asst. Director of Fisheries from the due dates has not<\/p>\n
been redressed.  He has therefore approached this Court<\/p>\n
with   the   above   writ   petition   for   a   declaration   that<\/p>\n
Ext.   P4   to   the   extent   his   right   for   promotion   was<\/p>\n
illegally   overlooked,   Ext.   P9   to   the   extent   his   name<\/p>\n
was   omitted   to   be   included   in   the   select   list   for   the<\/p>\n
post   of   Asst.   Director   of   Fisheries   for   the   year   2005<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
and   Ext.   P11   to   the   extent   he   is   denied   promotion   to<\/p>\n
the   post   of   Asst.   Director   of   Fisheries,   are<\/p>\n
unsustainable   and   liable   to   be   set   aside.            Other<\/p>\n
attendant benefits also have been prayed for.\n<\/p>\n
     9.   The   main   contention   taken   in   the   counter<\/p>\n
affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st  respondent is that<\/p>\n
none   of   the   juniors   of   the   petitioner   in   the   category<\/p>\n
of   Research   Assistant   was   promoted   as   Superintendent,<\/p>\n
F.T.C.   and   as   Asst.   Director   of   Fisheries.     It   is,<\/p>\n
however,   admitted   that   the   petitioner   is   liable   to   be<\/p>\n
included as Sl. No. 13 in the select list for the post<\/p>\n
of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   for   the   year   2001   and   that<\/p>\n
that right of the petitioner stands already restored in<\/p>\n
the   review   meeting   held   by   the   D.P.C.   on   13-7-2005.\n<\/p>\n
According   to   the   respondents,   only   those   officers   who<\/p>\n
are   placed   in   the   select   list   upto   Sl.   No.   8   were<\/p>\n
promoted   as   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   and   that   being   the<\/p>\n
position   the   petitioner’s   contention   is   liable   to   be<\/p>\n
repelled.\n<\/p>\n
     10.   The   petitioner   has   filed   a   reply   affidavit<\/p>\n
reiterating the stand taken in the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
     11.   Having   heard   counsel   for   the   petitioner   and<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                  -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
the   Govt.   Pleader   for   the   respondents,   I   am   of   the<\/p>\n
opinion   that   the   petitioner   is   entitled   to   get<\/p>\n
restoration   of   the   rights   he   had   lost   as   a   result   of<\/p>\n
the   error  committed  by  the  department  in  not  including<\/p>\n
his   name   in   Ext.   P2   select   list.     In   the   light   of   the<\/p>\n
indisputable   fact   that,   but   for   that   mistake   or<\/p>\n
omission,   the   petitioner   would   have   found   his   name   in<\/p>\n
Ext. P2 against Sl. No. 13, he is entitled to say that<\/p>\n
whatever   rights   and   benefits   he   could   have   enjoyed   by<\/p>\n
virtue of that rank position in Ext. P2 shall be worked<\/p>\n
out and granted by the respondents.   The fact that Dr.<\/p>\n
Sutharam happened to be included in Ext. P2 select list<\/p>\n
as   Sl.   No.   13   by   sheer   mistake   on   the   part   of   the<\/p>\n
department   and   that   Dr.   Sutharam   found   a   place   in   the<\/p>\n
revised   select   list   for   the   post   of   Research   Officers<\/p>\n
also   and   he   got   appointment   by   transfer   to   that   post,<\/p>\n
cannot be taken advantage of by the respondents to deny<\/p>\n
the   right   of   the   petitioner   on   the   ground   that<\/p>\n
promotion   to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   was<\/p>\n
granted only upto Sl. No. 8 in that list.  It cannot be<\/p>\n
disputed   that   the   turn   of   Research   Assistants   reached<\/p>\n
upto Sl. No. 13 and if the petitioner was holding rank<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                        -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
No.   13   instead   of   Dr.   Sutharam,   he   would   have   got<\/p>\n
promotion   to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   since<\/p>\n
he   had   no   other   avenue   for   promotion   unlike   Dr.<\/p>\n
Sutharam.     It   is   also   a   fact   which   cannot   be   denied<\/p>\n
that         had         the         petitioner         been         promoted         as<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   by   virtue   of   his   rank   against<\/p>\n
Sl.   No.   13,   he   would   definitely   have   been   promoted   as<\/p>\n
per Ext. P4 proceedings.   If that is so, the fact that<\/p>\n
the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   was   declared<\/p>\n
supernumerary   on   a   subsequent   date   cannot   affect   his<\/p>\n
right   to   be   promoted   as   per   Ext.   P4   and   that   he   would<\/p>\n
have   continued   as   a   supernumerary   hand   and   could   have<\/p>\n
worked out his rights by virtue of such appointment to<\/p>\n
the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.   to   the   next   higher<\/p>\n
post of Asst. Director.   It follows that Ext. P4 order<\/p>\n
is illegal to the extent it has denied promotion to the<\/p>\n
petitioner to the post of Superintendent, F.T.C.  There<\/p>\n
shall   be  a  declaration  that  the  petitioner  is  entitled<\/p>\n
to   be   promoted   to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.\n<\/p>\n
with   retrospective   effect   from   4-3-2003,   ie.   the   date<\/p>\n
from which Sl. No 8 in Ext. P2 select list was promoted<\/p>\n
to   the   post   of   Superintendent,   F.T.C.                            The   2nd<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005                   -12-<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent   is   directed   to   issue   appropriate   orders<\/p>\n
promoting the petitioner as Superintendent, F.T.C. with<\/p>\n
effect from 4-3-2003.\n<\/p>\n
     12.   Ext.   P9   has   been   drawn   up   without   taking   into<\/p>\n
account the fact that the petitioner is entitled to be<\/p>\n
treated as a member of the category of Superintendents,<\/p>\n
F.T.C.     Therefore,   the   D.P.C.   shall   hold   an   ad   hoc<\/p>\n
meeting   to   consider   the   case   of   the   petitioner   for<\/p>\n
transfer   appointment   to   the   post   of   Asst.   Director   of<\/p>\n
Fisheries   for   the   year   2005.     If   the   petitioner   is<\/p>\n
found   eligible   to   be   included   in   Ext.   P9,   he   shall   be<\/p>\n
promoted   as   Asst.   Director   of   Fisheries,   with   effect<\/p>\n
from   the   date   of   those   already   promoted   as   per   Ext.\n<\/p>\n
P11, ie. 12-8-2005.  Ordered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
     13.         Orders         promoting         the         petitioner         as<\/p>\n
Superintendent,   F.T.C.   with   effect   from   4-3-2003   with<\/p>\n
such   benefits   as   are   applicable   to   him   according   to<\/p>\n
law,   within   six   weeks   from   the   date   of   receipt   of   a<\/p>\n
copy of the judgment.  Ad hoc meeting of the D.P.C. for<\/p>\n
considering   the   case   of   the   petitioner   for   transfer<\/p>\n
appointment   to  the  post  of  Asst.  Director  of  Fisheries<\/p>\n
shall   be   convened   within   two   months   thereafter.     The<\/p>\n
WPC No. 33487\/2005             -13-<\/span><\/p>\n
entire   exercise   shall   be   completed   within   five   months<\/p>\n
from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.\n<\/p>\n
        The writ petition is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n
                                                K.K. DENESAN<\/p>\n
                                                    JUDGE<\/p>\n
jan\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 33487 of 2005(J) 1. R. SURESH KUMAR, RESEARCH ASSISTANT, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent 2. THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, 3. THE DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION COMMITTEE […]<\/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-235849","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nR. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - 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\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-01T04:06:57+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-01T04:06:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2310,\"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\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\",\"name\":\"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-01T04:06:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 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":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - 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\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-01T04:06:57+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007","datePublished":"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-01T04:06:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007"},"wordCount":2310,"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\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007","name":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-01-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-01T04:06:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-suresh-kumar-vs-state-of-kerala-on-30-january-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R. Suresh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 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\/235849","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=235849"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235849\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235849"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235849"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235849"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}