{"id":255276,"date":"2010-10-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010"},"modified":"2018-06-03T00:21:29","modified_gmt":"2018-06-02T18:51:29","slug":"p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 October, 2010<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 25\/10\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU\n\nW.P.(MD)NO.11631 of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2009\n\t\t\t\t\nP.Varadharajan\t\t\t\t..  Petitioner\n\nVs.\n\n1.State Express Transport Corporation,\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,\n   rep. By its Managing Director,\n   Pallavan Salai,\n   Chennai-600 002.\n2.State Express Transport Corporation,\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,\n   rep. By its General Manager (Administration),\n   Chennai-600 002.\n3.The Branch Manager,\n   Tiruchirappalli Depot,\n   State Express Transport Corporation,\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,\n   Tiruchirappalli.\t\t\t..  Respondents\n\n\n\tThis writ petition has been preferred under <a href=\"\/doc\/1712542\/\" id=\"a_1\">Article 226<\/a> of the\nConstitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus\nto call for the records relating to the order passed by the second respondent in\nRef.No.44761\/A7\/SETC(Tha.Na.Kho.1)\/2000, dated 23.09.2000 and to quash the same\nand consequently direct the respondents to provide the petitioner suitable\nalternative employment with pay protection, continuity of service, backwages\npayable with effect from 23.9.2000 to till date of providing duty to the\npetitioner and all other attendant benefits.\n\n!For Petitioner \t... Mr.A.Rahul\n^For Respondents \t... Mr.P.Thilakkumar\n\n- - - -\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThe petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition seeking<br \/>\nto challenge an order, dated 23.09.2000 passed by the second respondent and<br \/>\nseeks for a direction to respondents to provide suitable alternative employment<br \/>\nwith pay protection, continuity of service, backwages payable with effect from<br \/>\n23.09.2000 till the date of providing duty to the petitioner and all other<br \/>\nattendant benefits.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t2.The petitioner was working as a Driver in the respondent transport<br \/>\nCorporation with effect from 23.3.1992. During the year 2000, the petitioner was<br \/>\nsent for a check up by the Medical Board. The Medical Board gave an opinion that<br \/>\nthe petitioner was suffering from Color Blindness and not fit for the post of<br \/>\ndriver. Consequent upon the same, a show cause notice, dated 3.7.2000 was<br \/>\nissued. The petitioner in his explanation, dated 28.7.2000, stated that he may<br \/>\nbe provided with an alternative employment. But, however by an order, dated<br \/>\n23.09.2000, he was discharged from service. Though the petitioner again and<br \/>\nagain sent representations, asking for providing an alternative employment, the<br \/>\nsame was not provided and all his representations were kept pending. The<br \/>\npetitioner had also approached the Conciliation Officer. The respondent<br \/>\nCorporation took up the stand that there was no vacancy in the post of Helper<br \/>\nand hence alternative employment cannot be provided. The Conciliation Officer<br \/>\ngave a failure report, dated 4.9.2002.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\t3.The petitioner was again asked to appear before the Committee<br \/>\nconstituted by the Corporation regarding medical invalidated employees. The<br \/>\npetitioner had also appeared before the Committee on 16.7.2008 with Physical<br \/>\nFitness Certificate. But, despite the same, since the same was not forthcoming,<br \/>\nthe petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition, challenging the<br \/>\nearlier order of discharge dated 23.09.2000 as being contrary to <a href=\"\/doc\/639570\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 47(1)<\/a><br \/>\nof the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and<br \/>\nFull Participation) Act, 1995. The petitioner also referred to a judgment of the<br \/>\nSupreme Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1576104\/\" id=\"a_2\">Kunal Singh vs. Union of India and another<\/a> reported in 2003 (4)<br \/>\nSCC 524 and also a judgment of the division bench of this court in G.Muthu Vs.<br \/>\nTNSTC (Madurai) Ltd. reported in 2006 (5) CTC 413. The division bench in an<br \/>\nidentical circumstance found that even the colour blindness is a disability<br \/>\ncoming within the meaning of the Act. The petitioner also claimed that he passed<br \/>\nS.S.L.C. and he can do the work of Clerk, Time Keeper or in traffic regulations,<br \/>\nbut denying him the benefit of the Act is clearly illegal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\t4.When the writ petition came up for hearing on 13.11.2009, this court<br \/>\nordered notice of motion. Pending notice, no interim relief was granted.<br \/>\nSubsequently, when the matter came up again, this court found that the<br \/>\nrespondent corporation is total insensitive and has not realized the social<br \/>\nresponsibility and gave the following order, dated 27.09.2010, which reads as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\t&#8220;2.It is a sorry state of affairs in the Corporation that over the years,<br \/>\nhundreds of cases are filed before this Court as well as before the Principal<br \/>\nBench of this Court by the conductors and drivers of the Corporation, who<br \/>\nunfortunately became disabled due to employment related injuries. In most of the<br \/>\ncases, the employees were forced to come to this Court either for referring<br \/>\ntheir cases to the Regional Medical Board or for getting alternative employment<br \/>\nin terms of <a href=\"\/doc\/639570\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 47<\/a> of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\t3.When the Parliamentary Law on the subject <a href=\"\/doc\/639570\/\" id=\"a_4\">Section 47<\/a> of the 1995 Act<br \/>\nputs embargo on the Corporation from discharging such disabled employees and<br \/>\nmandates it to provide alternative employment, it is unnecessary for those<br \/>\nemployees to rush to this Court for getting appropriate relief.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t4.This Court and the Principal Bench of this Court have already passed<br \/>\nmore than 500 orders. In some cases, the Transport Corporation filed Writ<br \/>\nAppeals and some of those appeals were also dismissed even at the admission<br \/>\nstage. The subject matter of such issues are squarely covered by more than ten<br \/>\ndecisions of the Supreme Court. Therefore, the Transport Corporation need not<br \/>\ndrive parties to this Court to have their cases considered as if the law is<br \/>\nunclear.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\t5.The Corporation must realize its social responsibilities as well as the<br \/>\nwelfare of the workers in dealing with such cases. The Corporation should<br \/>\nimmediately constitute a Special Cell relating to disabled workmen, comprising<br \/>\nhigher level officers to consider such grievances on day-to-day basis rather<br \/>\nthan making the workers to come to this Court on each occasion and spend years<br \/>\ntogether for getting relief, which is guaranteed to them under the 1995 Act.<br \/>\nThis will avoid unnecessary hardship besides saving money for the workmen on<br \/>\ncostly litigation.  The Managing Director shall set in his affidavit the steps<br \/>\nto be taken in this regard. He is not expected to  just deal with the present<br \/>\ncase alone. &#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t5.Upon such directions, the respondents filed an evasive counter<br \/>\naffidavit, dated Nil and gave the following averment in paragraph 2, which reads<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">&#8220;2)It is submitted that in order to arrive at a common policy decision to deal<br \/>\nwith such cases of Medical disability for providing alternate employment by<br \/>\nforming a Special cell, the matter is being placed in the ensuing Board meeting<br \/>\nto be held in December 2010. The decision to be arrived in the Board Meeting<br \/>\nshall be common to all Transport Corporations, therefore, the Respondent prays<br \/>\nto seek time for implementing the order of Hon&#8217;ble Court in the said matter.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">\t6.This Court was not satisfied with the affidavit, which was furnished on<br \/>\n20.10.2010 and strictly directed the Corporation to abide by the interim order<br \/>\nwithout further inviting strictures against them. Thereafter, when the matter<br \/>\ncame up on 25.10.2010, the Corporation had filed a further counter affidavit,<br \/>\nwhich reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">&#8220;2)It is submitted that to complying the orders of the Hon&#8217;ble High Court,<br \/>\nMadurai Bench, Dated: 27.09.2010 in W.P.(MD).11631 of 2009, the following senior<br \/>\nofficials of this corporation are nominated and a Special cell is constituted to<br \/>\nreceive and attend the grievances of such of those employees who seek alternate<br \/>\nemployment based on the Medical report on day today basis.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">1)General Manager (Technical &amp; Administration)\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">2)Senior Deputy Manager\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">3)Corporation Medical Officer\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">4)Deputy Manager (Legal)\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">5)Assistant Manager (HR)<br \/>\nThe committee shall peruse the connected records and put up its recommendation<br \/>\nand remarks to the Managing Director to take appropriate action immediately.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">\t7.Atleast the respondent Corporation has now realized its corporate<br \/>\nresponsibility towards its employees and has come up with the formation of a<br \/>\ncommittee  as per the undertaking on 25.10.2010. But it is not suffice that such<br \/>\nan undertaking is given only to this court without it being let known to all<br \/>\nworkers. The concerned workmen who ran to length and breadth of the State must<br \/>\nalso be aware of such remedies available to them, lest on each occasion they may<br \/>\nbe forced to come to this court spending huge amount of litigation expenses.<br \/>\nTherefore, in the fitness of things, the respondent Corporation must be directed<br \/>\nto publish the formation of the Commission and the power delegated to the<br \/>\ncommittee apart from being exhibited in their notice boards must publish it in<br \/>\nleading Tamil newspapers, so that the workmen will be aware of their rights and<br \/>\ncan approach the in-house committee for the redressal of their grievances,<br \/>\nfailing which it will be always open to them  to come to this court. By the<br \/>\nconstitution of the committee, they can get the relief in terms of the<br \/>\nprovisions of the act and there will be no necessity for them to spend huge<br \/>\namounts besides time and energy of such workers as well as the Corporation will<br \/>\nbe saved. This court also will not be clogged with such unnecessary litigations.<br \/>\nAs the issue raised in the writ petition has been decided in plethora of cases<br \/>\nby this court both by the learned single judge as well as by the division bench<br \/>\nand that  precedents laid down by the Supreme Court was also clear.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">\t8.Insofar as the petitioner&#8217;s case is concerned, it is unnecessary that<br \/>\nthe issue should be sent before the Committee as the respondents themselves<br \/>\nacting upon the Medical Board&#8217;s opinion had terminated the service of the<br \/>\npetitioner without any justification.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">\t9.In view of the same, the writ petition will stand allowed with the<br \/>\nfollowing directions:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">\t(a)The petitioner shall be restored to service within eight weeks and will<br \/>\nbe paid all backwages from the period of discharge, i.e. 23.09.2000 till date of<br \/>\nrestoration. He will be paid backwages within the same time frame.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_21\">\t(b)The cost is quantified at Rs.5000\/- (Rupees five thousand only) shall<br \/>\nalso be paid towards lawyer&#8217;s fee payable to the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_22\">\t(c)The respondents are hereby directed to publish the formation of the<br \/>\nSpecial Cell as per the undertaking furnished to this court on 25.10.2010 in<br \/>\nfour Tamil dailies, i.e. Dinamani, Dinakaran, Dinamalar and Daily Thanthi in a<br \/>\nprominent way informing the workers about the constitution of the Special Cell,<br \/>\nits composition and the address in which the Special Cell will be functioning as<br \/>\nwell as the nature of the power entrusted to them. \t(d)This advertisement<br \/>\nshall be made on or before 15.12.2010 and report of compliance shall be sent to<br \/>\nthis court without fail.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_23\">Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_24\">vvk<br \/>\nTo\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_25\">1.The Managing Director,<br \/>\n   State Express Transport Corporation,<br \/>\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,<br \/>\n   Pallavan Salai,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 002.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_26\">2.The General Manager (Administration),<br \/>\n   State Express Transport Corporation,<br \/>\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 002.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_27\">3.The Branch Manager,<br \/>\n   Tiruchirappalli Depot,<br \/>\n   State Express Transport Corporation,<br \/>\n   Tamil Nadu Ltd.,<br \/>\n   Tiruchirappalli.\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 October, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25\/10\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)NO.11631 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2009 P.Varadharajan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.State Express Transport Corporation, Tamil Nadu Ltd., rep. By its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, [&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-255276","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.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - 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-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-02T18:51:29+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=\"9 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-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-02T18:51:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1567,\"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-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\",\"name\":\"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-02T18:51:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 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":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - 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-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-02T18:51:29+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-02T18:51:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010"},"wordCount":1567,"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-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010","name":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport ... on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-02T18:51:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-varadharajan-vs-state-express-transport-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.Varadharajan vs State Express Transport &#8230; on 25 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\/255276","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=255276"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255276\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255276"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255276"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255276"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}