{"id":244946,"date":"2008-09-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008"},"modified":"2016-11-20T03:56:26","modified_gmt":"2016-11-19T22:26:26","slug":"sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 16116 of 2008(R)\n\n\n1. SIBIN PAUL, THATTIL VALLACHIRAKARAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,\n\n3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,\n\n4. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER,\n\n5. RASHEEDA.P.B.,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SMT.S.KARTHIKA\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.C.HARIKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :23\/09\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.\n\n                   = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                   =W.P.(C) = = = = = = = = = = =\n                             No. 16116 OF 2008 R\n                     = = =\n\n\n              Dated this the 23rd day of September 2008\n\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The challenge is against Ext. P9, a list of Orthopaedically<\/p>\n
Handicapped persons forwarded by the 4th respondent for filling up<\/p>\n
the post of Junior Hindi Teacher earmarked to be filled up from<\/p>\n
among Physically Handicapped persons giving them the benefit of<\/p>\n
the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of<\/p>\n
Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.\n<\/p>\n
      2.     According to the petitioner, in 2005 there arose a<\/p>\n
vacancy of Junior Hindi Teacher in Thrissur District in the U.P.<\/p>\n
School which was set apart to be filled up from among the Physically<\/p>\n
Handicapped persons. It is stated that when steps were not taken<\/p>\n
for filling up the vacancy, the petitioner approached this Court and<\/p>\n
filed W.P.(C) No. 21988\/07. In that writ petition a contention was<\/p>\n
raised by the 2nd respondent therein that the post should be filled<\/p>\n
up by a Muslim Orthopaedically Handicapped person. The counter<\/p>\n
affidavit filed by the District Collector in that writ petition is Ext. R5<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                 – 2 –\n<\/p>\n
(d). In paragraph 6 of the said counter affidavit it was, inter alia,<\/p>\n
stated that in the category of Primary Teachers, appointments have<\/p>\n
already been made under the Direct Recruitment Scheme and that<\/p>\n
the last appointment made was from the category of “Open Blind”.<\/p>\n
Proceeding further, it was stated that as per G.O.(MS) No.<\/p>\n
86\/05\/LBR dated 27.8.2005, the next vacancy shall have to be<\/p>\n
reserved for “Muslim Ortho” and accordingly instructions have been<\/p>\n
given to the District Employment Officer to submit a panel of<\/p>\n
eligible candidates belonging to Muslim Ortho category for<\/p>\n
appointment as Junior Hindi Teacher.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    When the writ petition was pending before this Court,<\/p>\n
the Apex Court rendered Ext. P6 judgment wherein it was, inter alia,<\/p>\n
held that disabled persons constitute a special class by themselves<\/p>\n
and that question of making any further reservation on the basis of<\/p>\n
caste or creed or religion, ordinarily may not arise. When the writ<\/p>\n
petition came up for final hearing, taking note of the law laid down<\/p>\n
by the Apex Court in Ext.P6 judgment, this Court disposed of the<\/p>\n
writ petition directing that the District Collector shall fill up the post<\/p>\n
of Junior Hindi Teacher (Full Time) lying vacant in the Thrissur<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                 – 3 –\n<\/p>\n
District by appointing the eligible Physically Handicapped person<\/p>\n
without reference to communal rotation and in accordance with<\/p>\n
Section 33 of the Act referred to above. It is also to be noticed that<\/p>\n
in paragraph 2, this Court recorded the submission of the learned<\/p>\n
Govt. Pleader that if the petitioner is entitled to be appointed in the<\/p>\n
vacancy then available, petitioner could be accommodated.<\/p>\n
However, no positive direction has been given in the judgment.<\/p>\n
      4.    Subsequently, Ext. P9 list was forwarded by the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent to the 2nd respondent, for filling up the post by a<\/p>\n
suitable physically handicapped candidate.        A perusal of Ext. P9<\/p>\n
shows that the candidates sponsored by Ext. P9 are Orthopaedically<\/p>\n
Handicapped persons and it is in view of this, the petitioner who is a<\/p>\n
blind, has filed this writ petition seeking to challenge Ext. P9.<\/p>\n
Petitioner submits that there could not have been any reservation as<\/p>\n
is done in Ext. P9 and that if at all, any reservation is possible, the<\/p>\n
post has to be reserved for blind persons extending the benefit of<\/p>\n
Section 33 of the Act. It is also his contention that out of the 3%<\/p>\n
reservation, although Orthopaedically disabled persons are eligible<\/p>\n
for 1% reservation, Exts. P4 and P10 would show that there is an<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                 – 4 –\n<\/p>\n
excess representation from that category. Yet another contention<\/p>\n
raised by the petitioner is that the post of Junior Hindi Teacher,<\/p>\n
having been included among the eligible categories only in 2005,<\/p>\n
and this being the first vacancy the benefit of reservation should go<\/p>\n
to blind, which is the first among the 3 categories enumerated in<\/p>\n
Section 33 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    The learned Govt. Pleader submits on the basis of<\/p>\n
instructions that the alleged over representation is not because one<\/p>\n
category has been preferred over the other, but as all posts are not<\/p>\n
suitable for all categories of physically handicapped, when<\/p>\n
appointments are made, benefit is given to eligible candidates and<\/p>\n
that it was on account of this reason that the variation in percentage<\/p>\n
is indicated in Exts. P4 and P10. It is also his case that going by Ext.<\/p>\n
P3, the Hindi Teachers have been included among the primary<\/p>\n
teachers and therefore Primary Teachers as a whole will have to be<\/p>\n
taken as the eligible unit and in the eligible unit the last<\/p>\n
appointment made was from the category of blind and therefore the<\/p>\n
next will go to Orthopaedically handicapped.<\/p>\n
      6.    The 5th respondent would also support the plea raised by<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                 – 5 –\n<\/p>\n
the learned Govt. Pleader.     He would also submit that following<\/p>\n
receipt of Ext.P9, selection process was initiated and concluded and<\/p>\n
that by Ext. R5(d) he was selected and Ext. R5(c) appointment order<\/p>\n
was also issued to him.\n<\/p>\n
      7.    The question that arises for consideration is whether any<\/p>\n
claim of the petitioner for the benefit of reservation provided in<\/p>\n
Section 33 has been overlooked.          As rightly pointed by the<\/p>\n
petitioner, it was by Ext. P3 that the benefit of reservation provided<\/p>\n
in the Act was extended to the post of Junior Hindi Teachers. A<\/p>\n
reading of Ext. P3 shows that while extending the benefit of the<\/p>\n
Govt. Order dated 14.7.1998, the category of Junior Hindi Teacher<\/p>\n
was included in the category of primary teacher for the purposes of<\/p>\n
reservation under the Act. Therefore primary teacher is the unit and<\/p>\n
the reservation and its appropriation will have to be worked out in<\/p>\n
the category of primary teachers.\n<\/p>\n
      8.    Though     the   petitioner  claimed     entitlement   for<\/p>\n
appointment in W.P.(C) No. 21988\/07, that writ petition, as already<\/p>\n
noticed, was disposed of by Ext. P8 judgment directing that the<\/p>\n
District Collector should take steps for appointment. In Ext. R5(d)<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                  – 6 –\n<\/p>\n
counter affidavit the District Collector has made his stand known<\/p>\n
that the benefit of reservation has to be given to Orthopaedically<\/p>\n
Handicapped Muslim candidates. Following Ext.P6 judgment of the<\/p>\n
Apex Courts, this Court held that there is no question of any<\/p>\n
communal rotation applicable.         Therefore, all that the District<\/p>\n
Collector was expected to do so to make appointment among the<\/p>\n
eligible candidates.\n<\/p>\n
      9.   Ext. R5(d) counter affidavit also shows that the previous<\/p>\n
appointment in the category of Primary Teachers was given to a<\/p>\n
blind candidate.    It is on that basis the District Collector held that<\/p>\n
the next appointment will go to Orthopaedically Handicapped<\/p>\n
person.    This contention of the District Collector has not been<\/p>\n
interfered with in Ext. P8 judgment. For that reason and also for the<\/p>\n
reason that the unit of appointment to be worked out from among<\/p>\n
Primary Teachers, I have to accept the plea of the Govt. Pleader that<\/p>\n
since the earlier appointment was offered to the blind category, the<\/p>\n
next appointment will have to go to Orthopaedically disabled<\/p>\n
persons. Once that plea is accepted, there is nothing erroneous in<\/p>\n
Ext. P9 whereby the 4th respondent has confined the list to those<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.16116 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                  – 7 –\n<\/p>\n
Orthopaedically Handicapped persons. If that be so, selection of<\/p>\n
those candidates sponsored by Ext. P9 and the consequent selection<\/p>\n
of the 5th respondent and his appointment does not call for any<\/p>\n
interference.\n<\/p>\n
      10.   Petitioner has a further case that one more vacancy of<\/p>\n
Hindi Teacher (Part Time) is available and earmarked to be filled up<\/p>\n
from among the Physically Handicapped persons. If this assertion<\/p>\n
of the petitioner is factually right, since even according to the<\/p>\n
petitioner present vacancy is earmarked for 2005 the next vacancy<\/p>\n
will have to go to the blind candidates. Necessarily therefore, in<\/p>\n
case vacancy is available the District Collector should take steps for<\/p>\n
filling up the same it will be open to the petitioner to move the<\/p>\n
District Collector in this behalf.\n<\/p>\n
      Writ petition is disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n
                                                   ANTONY DOMINIC
\n                                                          JUDGE
\njan\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 16116 of 2008(R) 1. SIBIN PAUL, THATTIL VALLACHIRAKARAN … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS … Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, 4. THE DISTRICT […]<\/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-244946","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - 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\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-19T22:26:26+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\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-19T22:26:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1343,\"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\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-19T22:26:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - 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\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-19T22:26:26+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\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-19T22:26:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008"},"wordCount":1343,"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\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008","name":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-19T22:26:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sibin-paul-vs-state-of-kerala-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sibin Paul vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/244946","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=244946"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244946\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244946"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244946"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244946"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}