{"id":246251,"date":"2010-10-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010"},"modified":"2014-10-17T12:07:13","modified_gmt":"2014-10-17T06:37:13","slug":"nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 4205 of 2010(A)\n\n\n1. NANNANAN ATAVALATH, VELLOTH GOVINDAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.C.RATNAKARAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :04\/10\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                       K.T.SANKARAN, J.\n                  ---------------------------------------------\n                    W.P.(C).No.4205 of 2010\n                  ---------------------------------------------\n              Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010\n\n\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       The petitioner is working as Branch Manager of Ponniam<\/p>\n
Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. It is stated that he is the sixth<\/p>\n
son of Velloth Govindan and Nadayi Devi.                      According to the<\/p>\n
petitioner, he was born on 4.1.1955. But, in the school records<\/p>\n
and SSLC Book, his date of birth was entered as 5.1.1953. The<\/p>\n
case of the petitioner is that the date of birth was wrongly<\/p>\n
entered in the school records and SSLC Book. It is stated that<\/p>\n
the parents of the petitioner were illiterate and they were not<\/p>\n
aware of the consequence of a wrong date of birth being entered<\/p>\n
in the school records. The petitioner made an application to<\/p>\n
correct his date of birth in the school records. That application<\/p>\n
was rejected by Ext.P2 order dated 2.5.2002 passed by the<\/p>\n
Commissioner for Government Examinations. The reasons for<\/p>\n
rejection of the application are the following :<\/p>\n
                 “The evidence produced to prove the<\/p>\n
           claim of the petitioner are the documents read<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
          as paper 2 to 6. The said documents and the<\/p>\n
          Enquiry Report read as paper 7 have been<\/p>\n
          examined.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                The request of Sri.Nannanan Atavalath to<\/p>\n
          alter his date of birth from 5.1.1953 to 4.1.1955<\/p>\n
          has been examined in detail and found that the<\/p>\n
          extract of school admission register read as<\/p>\n
          paper 2 Sri.Nannanan was admitted to Std.I on<\/p>\n
          2.6.1958. If the correction is allowed he would<\/p>\n
          have his first schooling at the age of 3 years<\/p>\n
          and 5 months.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                Further the applicant failed to produce all<\/p>\n
          corroborative evidences like birth certificates of<\/p>\n
          his brothers and sisters. In the absence of birth<\/p>\n
          certificates of other members of the family a<\/p>\n
          comparative study is not possible in this case.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          Therefore,    the   request    of  Sri.Nannanan<\/p>\n
          Atavalath to correct his date of birth from<\/p>\n
          5.1.1953 to 4.1.1955 deserves no merit and<\/p>\n
          hence it is rejected.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    2.    The petitioner challenged Ext.P2 order before the<\/p>\n
Government.     The Government passed Ext.P5 order dated<\/p>\n
20.12.2002, confirming the order passed by the Commissioner.<\/p>\n
The petitioner challenged the orders in Writ Petition No.32361<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
of 2007. This Court directed the Government to reconsider the<\/p>\n
matter afresh in the light of Exts.P1(4) and P1(5) and also the<\/p>\n
attendant circumstances and dispose of the matter afresh. It is<\/p>\n
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Exts.P1<\/p>\n
(4) and P1(5) referred to in Ext.P5 order      are  respectively<\/p>\n
Exts.P1(4) Birth Certificate and P1(5) affidavit marked in this<\/p>\n
Writ Petition.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     3.    Thereafter, the Government passed Ext.P7 order<\/p>\n
dated 10.9.2009 rejecting the request for correction of date of<\/p>\n
birth of the petitioner in the school records and SSLC Book. In<\/p>\n
Ext.P7 order, it was held that in the affidavit dated 8.9.1999<\/p>\n
submitted by the petitioner before the Commissioner for<\/p>\n
Government Examinations, the date of birth of the petitioner and<\/p>\n
his brother and sister were noted as “as per Baptism”. That was<\/p>\n
one of the reasons stated for rejection of the application. The<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this finding is<\/p>\n
not correct. In Ext.P1 application, which is a form prescribed,<\/p>\n
column 3 is Date of Birth as per Baptism. Column 4 is Date of<\/p>\n
Birth as per Birth Register. The petitioner has shown the date<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    4<\/span><\/p>\n
of birth in column 3 and 4 as 4.1.1955.         The petitioner is<\/p>\n
admittedly a Thiyya. In Ext.P7 order, it is said that there could<\/p>\n
not be any Baptism, in these circumstances. It is true. But, in<\/p>\n
the affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Commissioner,<\/p>\n
such a statement is not there, as wrongly mentioned in Ext.P7.<\/p>\n
In Ext.P1 prescribed form, some dates are mentioned as against<\/p>\n
the column “Date of Birth as per Baptism”. That by itself is not a<\/p>\n
ground to reject the application.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      4.   Another ground stated in Ext.P7 is that the Birth<\/p>\n
Certificates of the other members of the family were not made<\/p>\n
available for a comparative study. In Ext.P1 (6) affidavit dated<\/p>\n
18th May 1999, it is revealed that three children of the parents of<\/p>\n
the petitioner died after delivery and that the birth or death<\/p>\n
were not registered. In Ext.P1 (5) Birth Certificate issued under<\/p>\n
the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, the date of birth of the<\/p>\n
petitioner is shown as 4.1.1955. The petitioner wants to<\/p>\n
incorporate that date in the school records and SSLC Book after<\/p>\n
correction.\n<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
      5.   The ground on which the Commissioner rejected the<\/p>\n
prayer for correction of date of birth as per Ext.P2, and by the<\/p>\n
Government in Ext.P5 was that if the date of birth as stated by<\/p>\n
the petitioner is accepted as correct, it would mean that the<\/p>\n
petitioner was admitted in the school before attaining the age of<\/p>\n
four years.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      6.   In Chandrika A.K. vs. State of Kerala and others<\/a><\/p>\n
(2010(1) KHC 132), this Court took the view that rejection of<\/p>\n
the application on the ground that the applicant had not attained<\/p>\n
the age of five years as provided in Rule 5 of Chapter VI of KER<\/p>\n
for admission in the first standard is not a ground for rejection of<\/p>\n
the application. It was held thus :\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                “It is not the law that when a person’s<\/p>\n
           date of birth is allowed to be corrected, the<\/p>\n
           advantage obtained by the said person based<\/p>\n
           on the irregular entry, has to be forfeited.<\/p>\n
           What is provided under the relevant rule is an<\/p>\n
           opportunity to correct the date of birth in the<\/p>\n
           school records on the basis of cogent materials<\/p>\n
           which, if accepted, would lead to the conclusion<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
           that the original entry has to be corrected.<\/p>\n
           Going by Rule 3 of Chapter VI KER a facility<\/p>\n
           has been provided to correct the date of birth<\/p>\n
           in the Admission Register and sub-rule (1A)<\/p>\n
           also provides for a facility for correcting the<\/p>\n
           date of birth in school records by the<\/p>\n
           commissioner of Government Examinations.<\/p>\n
           Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 is important. It provides<\/p>\n
           that “if the authority referred to in sub-rule (1)<\/p>\n
           is satisfied after necessary enquiries that the<\/p>\n
           change applied for could be granted, he will<\/p>\n
           issue an order to make the alteration…….”<\/p>\n
           Therefore, the enquiry is confined to the<\/p>\n
           question whether the original entry requires<\/p>\n
           alteration, in the light of the materials made<\/p>\n
           available by the applicant. If the applicant can<\/p>\n
           conclusively prove that the original entry does<\/p>\n
           not tally with the correct date of birth, based on<\/p>\n
           sufficient materials, power is given to the<\/p>\n
           authority to order an alteration. It is not the<\/p>\n
           law, therefore, that the advantage obtained by<\/p>\n
           the irregular entry, if at all anything is there,<\/p>\n
           will be detrimental to the applicant.         The<\/p>\n
           prohibition contained in Rule 5 of Chapter VI<\/p>\n
           have to be understood in the light of the above<\/p>\n
           fact.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
      7.   The reasons stated by the first respondent to reject<\/p>\n
the application submitted by the petitioner are apparently not<\/p>\n
correct, going by the records. As held in Chandrika A.K. vs. State<\/p>\n
of Kerala and others<\/a> (2010(1) KHC 132), the reasons stated by<\/p>\n
the Commissioner for rejection is also unsustainable. The<\/p>\n
Commissioner as well as the Government did not advert to the<\/p>\n
Birth Certificate issued under the Registration of Births and<\/p>\n
Deaths Act. In Ext.P6 judgment, a specific direction was issued<\/p>\n
to consider the Birth Certificate, but the first respondent failed<\/p>\n
to advert to the Birth Certificate.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      For the aforesaid reasons, Exts.P2, P5 and P7 orders are<\/p>\n
quashed. The Commissioner for Government Examinations shall<\/p>\n
consider the application afresh and pass orders after affording<\/p>\n
an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The<\/p>\n
Commissioner shall take into account all the relevant facts and<\/p>\n
the documents produced by the petitioner and shall arrive at a<\/p>\n
conclusion as to the correct date of birth of the petitioner. The<\/p>\n
petitioner shall have an opportunity to produce such other<\/p>\n
evidence and documents as may be relevant before the<\/p>\n
WPC 4205\/2010                  8<\/span><\/p>\n
Commissioner.     The Commissioner shall pass orders, as<\/p>\n
expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two<\/p>\n
months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.<\/p>\n
    The Writ Petition is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                             K.T.SANKARAN,
\n                                                   JUDGE
\ncsl<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 4205 of 2010(A) 1. NANNANAN ATAVALATH, VELLOTH GOVINDAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, … Respondent 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT For Petitioner :SRI.M.C.RATNAKARAN For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. […]<\/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-246251","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - 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\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-17T06:37:13+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\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-17T06:37:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1330,\"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\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-17T06:37:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - 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\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-17T06:37:13+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\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-17T06:37:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010"},"wordCount":1330,"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\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010","name":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-17T06:37:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nannanan-atavalath-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-4-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nannanan Atavalath vs The Principal Secretary on 4 October, 2010"}]},{"@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\/246251","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=246251"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246251\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246251"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246251"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246251"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}