{"id":258863,"date":"2009-07-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009"},"modified":"2015-11-27T21:33:04","modified_gmt":"2015-11-27T16:03:04","slug":"a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP.No. 29108 of 2001(M)\n\n\n\n1. A.GOPALAKRISHNAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. PRESIDENT,VETTIKKATTIRI SER.CO.OP.BANK\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.C<\/a>.SASIDHARAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :22\/07\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                   ANTONY DOMINIC,J.\n                ---------------------\n              O.P.Nos.29108 & 13182\/2001\n             ------------------------\n           Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2009.\n\n                        JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     O.P.No.13182\/01 has been filed by the President and<\/p>\n
Secretary of Vettikkattiri Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.,<\/p>\n
challenging the award rendered by the Industrial Tribunal,<\/p>\n
Palakkad in I.D.No.74\/99, ordering reinstatement of the<\/p>\n
first respondent workman with 50% back wages. The<\/p>\n
workman has filed O.P.No.29108\/01, challenging the said<\/p>\n
award to the extent 50% back wages is denied to him.<\/p>\n
Issues raised being common, these writ petitions are heard<\/p>\n
and disposed of together. For convenience, I shall refer to<\/p>\n
the exhibits marked in O.P.No.13182\/01.\n<\/p>\n
     2.   The workman was a junior clerk in the Bank<\/p>\n
referred to above. On the allegation of having committed<\/p>\n
certain    misconducts, including misappropriation and<\/p>\n
fabrication of records, he was placed under suspension on<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.         2<\/span><\/p>\n
1.11.1995. He was issued Ext.P1 charge sheet and following<\/p>\n
this, an Enquiry Officer was appointed and an enquiry was<\/p>\n
conducted.       Finally, Ext.P8 report was submitted by the<\/p>\n
Enquiry Officer finding the workman guilty of six out of seven<\/p>\n
charges levelled against him.\n<\/p>\n
     3. A copy of the enquiry report was furnished to the<\/p>\n
workman and after considering his representation against the<\/p>\n
findings of the Enquiry Officer, the report was accepted by the<\/p>\n
Sub Committee of the Board of Directors and finally the<\/p>\n
workman was dismissed from service,           with effect from<\/p>\n
1.11.1995. He filed Ext.P2 appeal to the Board of Directors<\/p>\n
which was considered by the appellate authority and by Ext.P3<\/p>\n
(2) resolution passed on 13.3.1998, the appeal was rejected.<\/p>\n
That    resolution was forwarded to the workman by Ext.P3<\/p>\n
communication.\n<\/p>\n
     4.     The workman        thereafter raised an individual<\/p>\n
dispute as contemplated under Section 2A<\/a> of the Industrial<\/p>\n
Disputes Act and by Ext.P4 order the legality of the dismissal<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.         3<\/span><\/p>\n
of the workman was referred for adjudication to the Industrial<\/p>\n
Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
      5. The Tribunal registered the reference as I.D.No.74\/99.<\/p>\n
Ext.P6 is the claim statement of the workman. Ext.P5 is the<\/p>\n
written statement and Ext.P7 is the rejoinder filed by the<\/p>\n
workman. Finally, Ext.P9 award was rendered by the Tribunal<\/p>\n
directing reinstatement of the workman with 50% back wages<\/p>\n
which is under challenge in these original petition.<\/p>\n
      6. Ext.P9 award shows that the validity of the enquiry<\/p>\n
was considered by the Industrial Tribunal as a preliminary<\/p>\n
issue and by its proceedings dated 21.12.2000, the Tribunal<\/p>\n
found the enquiry to be legal and valid. However, detailed<\/p>\n
order was reserved to be delivered along with the final award.<\/p>\n
It is stated that thereafter the parties were heard on 25.1.2001<\/p>\n
on the proportionality of punishment and thereafter the award<\/p>\n
in question was rendered.\n<\/p>\n
      7. The award shows that the enquiry file was perused by<\/p>\n
the Tribunal. The Tribunal found the description of the<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.         4<\/span><\/p>\n
documents to be irregular but however, held the same to be<\/p>\n
insufficient to set aside the enquiry held. Proceeding further,<\/p>\n
the Tribunal examined the correctness of the findings of the<\/p>\n
enquiry officer. The Tribunal held that broadly four charges<\/p>\n
were levelled against the workman and that since the findings<\/p>\n
of the enquiry officer are based on      some evidence,      the<\/p>\n
findings cannot be held to be perverse. It is also held that the<\/p>\n
enquiry is not vitiated for any procedural irregularity and that<\/p>\n
it was held in compliance with the principles of natural justice.<\/p>\n
      8. Thus after upholding the enquiry and the findings of<\/p>\n
the Enquiry Officer, in paragraph 7 of the award, the Tribunal<\/p>\n
posed the question whether the charges proved against the<\/p>\n
workman would amount to grave misconducts warranting the<\/p>\n
extreme punishment of dismissal from service. This obviously<\/p>\n
is in exercise of the Tribunal’s power under Section 11A<\/a> of the<\/p>\n
I.D Act.\n<\/p>\n
      9. Accordingly, the gravity of the misconducts for<\/p>\n
appreciating the proportionality of the punishment imposed<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.         5<\/span><\/p>\n
was examined and the Tribunal concluded that, it cannot be<\/p>\n
held that the Workman had committed the misconduct of<\/p>\n
misappropriation or falsification of records, vide paragraph<\/p>\n
10 of the award. Again in paragraph 11, the Tribunal held that<\/p>\n
charge numbers II and IV mentioned in paragraph 5 of the<\/p>\n
award, would         not amount to misconducts and the said<\/p>\n
allegation has been raised without any bona fides. Proceeding<\/p>\n
further in paragraph 12 it is held that charge No.III mentioned<\/p>\n
in paragraph 5 of the award proved against the workman has<\/p>\n
to be considered as a misconduct warranting disciplinary<\/p>\n
action. Therefore, of the       four  charges that are broadly<\/p>\n
classified in paragraph 5 of the Award, except in relation to<\/p>\n
charge No.III, the Tribunal has held that the other misconducts<\/p>\n
are either not       misconducts or that, the workman has not<\/p>\n
committed the same.\n<\/p>\n
     10. In my view, the approach adopted by the Tribunal<\/p>\n
cannot be upheld. As held by the Apex Court in Workmen of<\/p>\n
Fire stone Tyre & Rubber Co. V. Management & ors<\/a>.(1973(2)<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.          6<\/span><\/p>\n
LLJ 278), while exercising the power under Section 11A<\/a> of the<\/p>\n
Industrial Disputes Act, the Tribunal has first to examine the<\/p>\n
validity of the enquiry conducted. Once an enquiry has been<\/p>\n
held to be validly conducted and the findings of the enquiry<\/p>\n
officer are also upheld, the Tribunal has to consider whether<\/p>\n
the punishment imposed is proportionate to the gravity of the<\/p>\n
misconduct.\n<\/p>\n
     11. In this case, as mentioned in paragraph 3 of the<\/p>\n
award, by proceedings dated 21.12.2000, the Tribunal held<\/p>\n
the enquiry to be legal and valid. In the award itself, while<\/p>\n
giving its reasons      in support of the aforesaid findings, the<\/p>\n
Tribunal has held that the enquiry was held in accordance<\/p>\n
with the principles of natural justice,   that it was not vitiated<\/p>\n
for any procedural error and that the findings of the Enquiry<\/p>\n
Officer are based on some evidence and therefore cannot be<\/p>\n
held perverse. Once the enquiry has been upheld and the<\/p>\n
findings of the Enquiry Officer are also held as not perverse,<\/p>\n
in my view all that remains to be done by the Tribunal is to<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.        7<\/span><\/p>\n
decide on the proportionality of the punishment based on the<\/p>\n
material on records, as provided in the proviso to Section 11<\/a> A<\/p>\n
of the Industrial Disputes Act. In that process, the Tribunal<\/p>\n
cannot once again examine the findings of the Enquiry Officer<\/p>\n
each of the misconducts and decide as to whether those<\/p>\n
misconducts are proved or whether the acts alleged against<\/p>\n
the workman are misconducts at all. In this case, while<\/p>\n
exercising its powers under Section 11-A<\/a> of the Industrial<\/p>\n
Disputes Act, the Tribunal clearly committed a grave error<\/p>\n
and for that reason, the award cannot be up held.<\/p>\n
     12. Therefore O.P.No.13182\/01 is disposed of quashing<\/p>\n
Ext.P9    award      rendered by the  Industrial  Tribunal   in<\/p>\n
I.D.No.74\/99 and the Tribunal is directed to reconsider the<\/p>\n
matter and decide on the proportionality of punishment<\/p>\n
imposed on the workman, petitioner in O.P.No.29108\/01. This<\/p>\n
shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate<\/p>\n
within 2 months from the date of production of a copy of the<\/p>\n
judgment.\n<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.      8<\/span><\/p>\n
     In so far as O.P.No.29108\/01 is concerned, now that I<\/p>\n
have set aside the award and the matter has been remanded<\/p>\n
for fresh consideration, there is no question of allowing this<\/p>\n
Original Petition. Dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                                     (ANTONY DOMINIC)
\n                                           JUDGE
\nvi\/<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.          9<\/span><\/p>\n
 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSHKUMAR<\/p>\n
                                  ANTONY DOMINIC,J.\n<\/p>\n
                                  ———————\n<\/p>\n
                            O.P.Nos.29108 & 13182\/2001\n<\/p>\n
                                  ———————-\n<\/p>\n
                        Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                            JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
O.P.Nos.29108\/01 & anor.    10<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP.No. 29108 of 2001(M) 1. A.GOPALAKRISHNAN … Petitioner Vs 1. PRESIDENT,VETTIKKATTIRI SER.CO.OP.BANK … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN For Respondent :SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON The Hon’ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC Dated :22\/07\/2009 O R D E R ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ——————— […]<\/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-258863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nA.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - 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\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-27T16:03:04+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-27T16:03:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1237,\"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\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\",\"name\":\"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-27T16:03:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - 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\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-27T16:03:04+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-27T16:03:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009"},"wordCount":1237,"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\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009","name":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-27T16:03:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-gopalakrishnan-vs-president-on-22-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.Gopalakrishnan vs President on 22 July, 2009"}]},{"@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\/258863","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=258863"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258863\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}