{"id":242570,"date":"2006-11-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-11-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006"},"modified":"2018-06-06T15:49:56","modified_gmt":"2018-06-06T10:19:56","slug":"p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","title":{"rendered":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDated : 02\/11\/2006\n\n\nCoram\nThe Honourable Mr.Justice N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR\n\n\nW.P(MD)No.6163 of 2006 and M.P.No.1\n\n\nP.K.Periakaruppa Thevar\t...\tPetitioner\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n1.The Director Collector,\nMadurai.\n\n2.The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology,\nMadurai.\n\n3.V.S.Thayappa Pillai.\t\t...\tRespondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nWrit petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India,\npraying this Court to issue a writ of     Certiorarified mandamus calling for\nthe records of the first respondent in Roc.No.1087\/2005\/Mines-A dated 29.4.2006\nand quash the same and further forbear the third respondent from doing quarry\nwork in S.Nos.18\/3A-1A and 18\/3A-1C over an extent of 0.78.0 hectares in\nAchankulam village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District.\n\n\n!For Petitioner\t\t\t...\tMr.M.Vallinayagam\n\n\n^For Respondents 1 and 2\t...\tMrs.Jessi Jeeva Priya,\n\t\t\t\t\tSpecial Govt.Pleader\n\nFor 3rd Respondent\t\t...\tMr.V.Sitharanjandas\n\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tIn this writ petition, petitioner seeks to quash the order of the first<br \/>\nrespondent in Roc.No.1087\/2005\/Mines-A dated 29.4.2006 and to forbear the third<br \/>\nrespondent from doing quarry work in S.Nos.18\/3A-1A and 18\/3A-1C over an extent<br \/>\nof 0.78.0 hectares in Achankulam village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.\tPetitioner is the owner of the lands in S.Nos.18\/3A, 19 and 20, an<br \/>\nextent of 13 acres in Kallanai Achankulam Village, Thirumangalam Taluk.   The<br \/>\nthird respondent has got property in S.Nos.18\/3A-1A and 18\/3A-1C and the said<br \/>\nproperty lies on the western side of petitioner&#8217;s property.  Petitioner states<br \/>\nthat he is having a farm house and cattle shed in his property and he is<br \/>\nresiding with his family there and doing agricultural operations in his lands.<br \/>\nThird respondent is doing quarry work in his lands, adjacent to the petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nproperty, using explosives for quarrying stones.  Petitioner further states that<br \/>\non many occasions, the blasted stones fell on petitioner&#8217;s house, pump set and<br \/>\ncattle shed.  On one occasion, petitioner&#8217;s daughter by name Panchavarnam got<br \/>\ninjured due to the fall of stone on her back.  It is also stated that the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s cattles were also injured many times.  According to the petitioner,<br \/>\nthe police complaint given to the authorities was not entertained.   Petitioner<br \/>\nfurther states that he submitted his objections to the respondents 1 and 2 on<br \/>\n29.11.2005, 5.12.2005, 13.2.2006, 12.4.2006 and 15.4.2006, but without looking<br \/>\ninto the objections made by the petitioner for the grant of quarry mining lease<br \/>\nto the third respondent, the first respondent granted permission by his<br \/>\nproceedings dated 29.4.2006 for five years.  The grievance of the petitioner is<br \/>\nthat the first respondent in spite of receipt of petitioner&#8217;s objections<br \/>\nreferred above, without conducting any enquiry, granted permission to the third<br \/>\nrespondent as if no objection has been received for the grant of quarry permit.<br \/>\nHence the petitioner challenges the said order in this writ petition on the<br \/>\nground that the order of the first respondent is passed on total non-application<br \/>\nof mind and the petitioner&#8217;s objections were not considered, particularly when<br \/>\nthe petitioner has pointed out that petitioner&#8217;s family members, cattles and the<br \/>\nbelongings of the petitioner were damaged due to the blast of quarry stones.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.\tFirst respondent filed counter affidavit on 25.9.2006 and stated<br \/>\nthat for the past 10 years the third respondent is doing quarrying operation and<br \/>\nif really there is any objection in the Village stating that the public or the<br \/>\ncattle had been affected due to quarrying of the rough stones, the third<br \/>\nrespondent would not have continued   quarrying operations. It is further stated<br \/>\nthat the Tahsildar&#8217;s report was considered and thereafter only the impugned<br \/>\norder was passed.  It is also stated that the objection raised by the petitioner<br \/>\nis due to personal gain and there is no truth in the said objection as stated by<br \/>\nthe Tahsildar in his report.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.\tFirst respondent again filed an additional counter affidavit on<br \/>\n31.10.2006 and stated that the representation of the petitioner submitted<br \/>\nearlier were considered and thereafter only the impugned order was passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.\tThe third respondent has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is<br \/>\nstated that petitioner&#8217;s complaints were considered by the Tahsildar,<br \/>\nThirumangalam and the Assistant Geologist, Madurai, and based on the report of<br \/>\nthe said officers, he was granted the quarrying permit and therefore the same is<br \/>\nperfectly in order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.\tI have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective<br \/>\nparties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.\tFrom a perusal of the impugned order dated 29.4.2006 it is seen that<br \/>\nthe field applied for quarrying operation was inspected by the Assistant<br \/>\nGeologist and the Tahsildar, Tirumangalam Taluk and they have submitted their<br \/>\nreports and A-1 notice was also published in the village by the Village<br \/>\nAdministrative Officer, Achankulam and as there was no objection received for<br \/>\nthe grant of quarry lease,  based on the Assistant Geologist (Mines) Inspector&#8217;s<br \/>\nreport,  the mining lease was renewed for five years as the first respondent is<br \/>\nempowered to grant the lease as per the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession<br \/>\nRules, 1959.  In the impugned order it is stated that on receipt of the<br \/>\napplication for grant of mining lease under Rule 19, the District Collector has<br \/>\nto see that whether there is any objection for the grant of lease.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.\tIn this case, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner, petitioner has submitted his objections on several occasions, to the<br \/>\nfirst respondent on 6.9.2004, 17.4.2006 and to the second respondent on<br \/>\n24.10.2005, etc., pointing out the damages caused to the petitioner due to the<br \/>\nquarrying work done by the third respondent and the petitioner has made repeated<br \/>\ncomplaints to the authorities on 10.1.2000, 27.3.2000, 6.8.2002, 6.9.2004 etc.,<br \/>\neven prior to the expiry of earlier period of lease. In the complaint dated<br \/>\n6.8.2000, the petitioner has stated that due to the blast of stones, one of his<br \/>\ncattle died on 30.5.2000 and a police complaint was given for which receipt<br \/>\nNo.119 of 2000 was also issued by the Sub Inspector of Police, Koodakovil Police<br \/>\nStation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.\tPetitioner also gave written complaint to the District Collector on<br \/>\n6.9.2004 and 17.4.2006 which are  acknowledged by the first respondent.  The<br \/>\nfirst respondent who is bound to consider the objections has not chosen to<br \/>\nconsider the same by conducting enquiry by himself.  Even in the counter<br \/>\naffidavit it is stated that he has passed the impugned order based on the<br \/>\nreports submitted by the Tahsildar and the Assistant Geologist.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.\tThe impugned order further states that objection has not been<br \/>\nreceived for the grant of quarrying lease in favour of the third respondent.<br \/>\nThe same is factually incorrect in the light of the objection submitted by the<br \/>\npetitioner stated supra.  Hence it is to be held that the first respondent<br \/>\npassed the impugned order on total non-application of mind and without reference<br \/>\nto Rule 19(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, which<br \/>\nmandates the first respondent to consider the objections, if any received, give<br \/>\nopportunity of hearing to the petitioner and then pass appropriate orders.  For<br \/>\nproper appreciation, Rule 19(2)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession<br \/>\nRules, 1959, is extracted hereunder,<br \/>\n\t&#8220;On receipt of an application for grant of a quarrying permit under clause\n<\/p>\n<p>(a), the District Collector, if he sees no valid objection, may grant quarrying<br \/>\npermission to the applicant. If there is any valid objection, the District<br \/>\nCollector shall give the applicant an opportunity of hearing before rejecting<br \/>\nthe application.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Rule 20 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959 prescribes<br \/>\ndisposal of application wherein also consideration of objection is contemplated,<br \/>\nwhich reads as follows,<br \/>\n\t&#8220;On receipt of any application referred to in rule 19, the District<br \/>\nCollector, if he sees no valid objection, may grant quarrying lease to the<br \/>\napplicant subject to the conditions stipulated in these rules, but no such lease<br \/>\nshall be granted except with the previous sanction of the State Government if<br \/>\nthe minerals are to be worked by or on behalf of any person who is not a citizen<br \/>\nof India.  The minimum period for grant of quarrying lease for stone shall not<br \/>\nbe less than one year and the maximum period shall not exceed 5 years and the<br \/>\nminimum period for grant of quarrying lease for sand and other minerals except<br \/>\ngranite shall not be less than one year and the maximum period shall not exceed<br \/>\nthree years.  Where the District Collector refuses to grant quarrying lease, the<br \/>\nreasons therefor shall be communicated to the applicant in writing.&#8221;<br \/>\nHence it is the duty of the first respondent to see that no valid objection is<br \/>\nthere for the grant of quarry lease.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.\tThe contention of the first respondent that based on the report<br \/>\nsubmitted by the Tahsildar and Assistant Geologist the impugned order has been<br \/>\npassed also cannot be sustained because copy of the reports have not been<br \/>\nfurnished to the petitioner and the petitioner was not heard by the first<br \/>\nrespondent before passing the impugned order.  Hence the said contention is also<br \/>\nrejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.\tSince the impugned order is passed in violation of Rule 19(2)(b) and<br \/>\n20 of the Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959, the same is set<br \/>\naside.  The first respondent is directed to pass fresh orders after conducting<br \/>\nenquiry and considering the objections of the petitioner and pass fresh orders<br \/>\nwithin a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe writ petition is ordered accordingly.  No costs.  Connected<br \/>\nmiscellaneous petitions are closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>vr<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe Director Collector,\tMadurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Madurai.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 02\/11\/2006 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.6163 of 2006 and M.P.No.1 P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director Collector, Madurai. 2.The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Madurai. 3.V.S.Thayappa Pillai. &#8230; [&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-242570","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>P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - 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\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-06T10:19:56+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-06T10:19:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1422,\"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\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\",\"name\":\"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-06T10:19:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - 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\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-06T10:19:56+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006","datePublished":"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-06T10:19:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006"},"wordCount":1422,"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\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006","name":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-06T10:19:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-k-periakaruppa-thevar-vs-the-director-collector-on-2-november-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.K.Periakaruppa Thevar vs The Director Collector on 2 November, 2006"}]},{"@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\/242570","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=242570"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242570\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=242570"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=242570"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=242570"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}