{"id":260750,"date":"2004-09-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-09-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004"},"modified":"2014-05-28T14:22:50","modified_gmt":"2014-05-28T08:52:50","slug":"col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","title":{"rendered":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 13\/09\/2004\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN\n\nW.P.No.1387 of 1997\n\nCol.K.Malaippan                        ....  Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1.  The Government of India,\n     rep. by Secretary to Government,\n     Ministry of Defence,  South Block,\n     D.H.G. Post, New Delhi 110 011.\n\n2.  Military Secretary,\n     Army Head Quarters,\n     D.H.G. Post, New Delhi - 110 011.          .... Respondents\n\n        Writ petition filed under Article 226<\/a> of  The  Constitution  of  India\npraying for the issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioner :  Mr.  N.S.Sivam\n\nFor Respondents:  Mr.  V.T.Gopalan, Addl.  Solicitor General\n                Assisted by Mr.V.Balasubramanian,\n                ACGSC\n\n\n:O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
                The request of the petitioner to change the date of birth from
\n15.0 7.44 to 22.06.46 and his consequential claim to continue his service upto
\n30.06.1999  was  rejected  by  the  first  respondent in his proceedings dated
\n30.07.1996.  Hence, the  petitioner  has  chosen  to  file  the  present  writ
\npetition  seeking  to  call  for  the records of the respondents culminated in
\nOrder No.7(6)\/91\/D(MS) dated 30th July 1996 of the first respondent and  quash
\nthe  said  order  No.7(6)\/91\/D  (MS)  dated  30th  July  1996  and  direct the
\nrespondents to incorporate 22.06.1946 as the date of birth of  the  petitioner
\nin  the  service  records  and accord all service benefits like promotions and
\nother monetary benefits that will lawfully accrued to the  petitioner  in  the
\nservice upto 30.6.1999 .\n<\/p>\n
                2.1.   In  brief, the petitioner joined service in the Army on
\n20.12.1970 declaring his date of birth as 15.7.1944 and the same has been duly
\nentered into his service register.  The Government of India  in  the  Official
\nMemorandum  dated  21.04.1964 concededly prescribed that no request for change
\nof date of birth would be entertained after the lapse of two  years  from  the
\ndate  of i) grant of first commission in the case of commissioned officers and\n<\/p>\n
(ii) enrolment in case of JCOs\/ Other ranks and equivalent in  the  other  two
\nservices.   The above time of two years to request for change of date of birth
\nexpires on 19.12.19 72 in the case of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
                2.2.   However,  the  petitioner  had   chosen   to   make   a
\nrepresentation  to  the  second  respondent  only on 23.2.1977, requesting the
\nsecond respondent  to  change  the  date  of  birth  of  the  petitioner  from
\n15.07.1944 to 22.6.1946.  The only explanation according to the petitioner was
\nthat,  he was in the Field Area from 24.3.1972 to 17.11.1979 and therefore the
\nlimitation prescribed under the said Official Memorandum is not applicable  in
\nview  of  the  provisions  of  the  Indian  Soldiers  (  Litigation)  Act<\/a> 1925
\n(hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act<\/a>).  Since the respondent by  their  letter
\ndated  25.10.1977 informed the petitioner that his request could be considered
\nonly if he could get the date of birth corrected in his University records and
\nin the S.S.L.C, the petitioner had chosen to move the Civil Court  to  declare
\nhis  correct date of birth as 22.06.1946, which culminated into a decree dated
\n06.03.19 84 made in S.A.No.615 of 1979 declaring his correct date of birth  as
\n22.06.1946.\n<\/p>\n
        2.3  Concededly,  even though the Director of School Education, Madras
\nand District  Collector,  Madurai  were  impleaded  as  parties  to  the  suit
\nproceedings, the  respondents  were not impleaded as party at all.  Of course,
\nthe Government in G.O.M.S.No.48 Education Department dated  12.01.1987,  as  a
\nspecial  case, directed the Director of School Education if satisfied himself,
\nbased on the decree in S.A.No.615 of 1977 dated  06.03.1984,  to  correct  the
\ndate of birth of the petitioner in his school records, namely, S.S.L.C.  Based
\non  the  above  documents,  the  petitioner  requested the first respondent to
\ncorrect his date of birth in his  service  register  and  other  consequential
\nattendant benefits.   The first respondent after careful consideration however
\nrejected the request of the petitioner, by the proceedings  dated  30.07.1996,
\nwhich is impugned in the above writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
        3.  In this connection, it is apt to refer the relevant portion of the
\nimpugned order dated 30.07.1996, which reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
                “…    Government   of  India  vide  MOD  officer  Memorandum
\nNo.35(1)\/A\/63\/D(Coord) dt.  21 April  1964  prescribed  that  no  request  for
\nchange  of date of birth will be entertained after the lapse of two years from
\nthe date of (i) grant of first commission, in case  of  commissioned  officers
\nand  ;  (ii)  enrolment  in  case  of  JCOs\/ORs  and  equivalents in other two
\nservices.  It  was  informed  during  discussions  on  this  case  that  these
\ninstructions  have been uniformally followed by the Government in all cases of
\nofficers past except in cases where change of the date of birth was ordered by
\nthe Courts, even when the application was made after  two  years.    It  will,
\ntherefore,  be unjust to the officers whose applications were rejected on this
\nbasis if any relaxation is allowed in the present case.\n<\/p>\n
        I also find that in the case of Union of India Vs.  Harnam Singh  (199
\n3(2); SSC page 162), decided by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in 1993,
\nthe Honourable Court ruled that a Government Servant must apply for correction
\nof  date  of  birth without any unreasonable delay and that the Government was
\ncompetent to fix a reasonable  time  limit  after  which  no  application  for
\ncorrection of date of birth can be entertained.\n<\/p>\n
        I  am  of  the  opinion  that  2  years  time  limit prescribed by the
\nGovernment, as mentioned above, is quite  reasonable.    The  officer  in  his
\npetition  before  the  Honourable Delhi High Court has tried to take advantage
\nunder the order 663 of 73.  The officer’s averment that the limitation  period
\nwas  not  applicable  in his case in view of Army Order 66 3\/73, is untenable.
\nThis order is applicable only to the officers belonging  to  the  Corps  other
\nthan  Engineers,  Medical,  Signals  &  EME  who  were initially granted Short
\nService Regular Commission and to those commissioned from JCSO\/ORs  fulfilling
\ncertain conditions.    The officer does not fall under any of these categories
\nand hence cannot claim any advantage under this order.\n<\/p>\n
        I am, therefore of the view  that  the  officer  had  reasonable  time
\navailable  to  him to make application for change of date of birth, within the
\ntime limit prescribed by the Government, but he failed to do so.  There is  no
\ncase to  allow  any  relaxation  of  this  limitation  to  him.    Hence,  the
\napplication of 9th May 1987 filed by Maj (now Col) K.  Maliappan of  Corps  of
\nSignals is hereby rejected.”\n<\/p>\n
        4.   Assailing  the said order dated 30.07.1996, Mr.N.S.Sivam, learned
\ncounsel appearing  for  the  petitioner  submits  that  two  years  period  of
\nlimitation  is  not  applicable  for the reasons that he was in the Field Area
\nbetween 24.3.1972 and 17.11.1979, and in any event, he  is  entitled  for  the
\nbenefits  of  the  decree  dated  06.03.1984  made  in  S.A.No.615 of 1977 and
\nG.O.Ms.48, Education Department dated 12.01.1987.\n<\/p>\n
        5.  Per contra, Mr.V.T.Gopalan, Additional Solicitor General appearing
\nfor the respondents contends  that  the  provisions  of  the  Indian  Soliders
\n(Litigation) Act would not be applicable to the petitioner as it is applicable
\nonly for  defending  the  suits  or appeals filed against the soldiers.  It is
\nfurther contended that the decree dated 06.03.1 984 made in S.A.No.615 of 1977
\nand consequential Government order G.  O.Ms.No.48 Education  Department  dated
\n12.01.1987  are  not  binding  on  the  respondents as the respondents are not
\nparties to the proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
        6.  From the above contentions, the  following  issues  arise  for  my
\nconsideration:\n<\/p>\n
        i)  Whether the Indian Soldiers (Litigation) Act 1925 is applicable to
\nthe facts and circumstances of the case?\n<\/p>\n
        ii) Whether the decree dated 06.03.1984 made in S.A.No.615 of 1977  is
\nbinding on the respondents or not ?  and\n<\/p>\n
        iii) To what relief the petitioner is entitled to?\n<\/p>\n
        7.1 Issue  No.1:  Whether the Indian Soldiers (Litigation) Act 1925 is
\napplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case?\n<\/p>\n
        7.2.  As per the statement of objects and  reasons  for  enacting  the
\nIndian  Soldiers (Litigation) Act<\/a> 1925, the Act is intended to consolidate and
\namend the law to provide special  protection  in  respect  of  the  civil  and
\nrevenue litigation  of  Indian  Soldiers serving under war condition.  The Act<\/a>
\napplies  to  Indian  Soldiers  serving  under  War  conditions  and   provides
\ninter-alia  for the postponement in certain circumstances of civil and revenue
\nproceedings in which an unrepresented Indian Soldier is a party  and  for  the
\ndeduction  from  periods  of  limitation  in  suits appeals or applications by
\nIndian Soldiers of the periods during which they have been serving  under  war
\nconditions.\n<\/p>\n
        7.3.   Even  though  there is no bar neither under the Indian Soldiers
\n(Litigation) Act<\/a> 1925 nor under any Government Memorandum for  the  petitioner
\nto make representation within two years, the petitioner had not chosen to make
\nany representation within the said time.  It would be a different issue if the
\npetitioner  had  made  such  representation  on  or  before 19.12.1972 and the
\nrespondent required the petitioner to file a suit getting his  University  and
\nschool  records  corrected  and in which event certainly the provisions of the
\nAct would have been made applicable, and the period of limitation  would  thus
\nhave been  protected.   Therefore, in my considered opinion, the petitioner is
\nnot entitled to say  that  the  period  of  limitation  prescribed  under  the
\nGovernment  order  that  he  should  have  made request within two years on or
\nbefore 19.12.1972 is protected under the Act cannot be  sustainable.    Hence,
\nthe issue No.1 is answered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
        8.1.  Issue  No.2:    Whether the decree dated 06.03.1984 made in S.A.
\nNo.615 of 1977 is binding on the respondents or not ?\n<\/p>\n
        8.2.  The petitioner having joined in the service declaring  his  date
\nof  birth  as  15.07.1944  and  while seeking correction of his date of birth,
\nought to have been impleaded the employer  in  the  Civil  suit.    Since  the
\npetitioner had deliberately failed to implead the respondent as a party in the
\nsuit,  as  rightly  contended by the learned Additional Solicitor General, the
\nsaid decree in the Second Appeal No.615 of 1977 much  less  the  consequential
\nGovernment  order  G.O.Ms.No.48  Education  Department dated 12.01.1987 is not
\nbinding on the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
        8.3.  The Apex Court in Union of India  v.    C.Ramaswamy  and  others<\/a>
\nreported  in (1997) 4 SCC 647, whereunder one Mr.Ramaswamy has adopted a novel
\nmethod to pursue his desire to get his date of birth altered by filing a  suit
\nbefore  the  District  Munsif,  Sholinghur  impleading  the Director of School
\nEducation, Madras; District Educational Officer, Vellore and his eldest sister
\nKamala as defendants without  impleading  his  employers,  namely,  The  Andra
\nPradesh Government  where  he  was  recruited  as I.P.S.  Officer in the cadre
\nstrength of Andrapradesh and the Apex Court depreciating such attempts held as
\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n
        …para 25.  ” In matters relating to appointment to  service  various
\nfactors  are  taken  into  consideration  before  making  a  selection  or  an
\nappointment.  One of the relevant circumstances is the age of the  person  who
\nis sought  to be appointed.  It may not be possible to conclusively prove that
\nan advantage had been  gained  by  representing  a  date  of  birth  which  is
\ndifferent than that which is later sought to be incorporated.  But it will not
\nbe  unreasonable  to  persume  that  when  a candidate, at the first instance,
\ncommunicates a particular date of birth there is obviously his intention  that
\nhis  age  calculated  on  the basis of that date of birth should be taken into
\nconsideration by the appointing authority for adjudging his suitability for  a
\nresponsible office.   …    In  such  a situation, it would be against public
\npolicy to permit such  a  change  to  enable  longer  benefit  to  the  person
\nconcerned.  …..\n<\/p>\n
        para 26.   …..    Once  having  a  secured  entry  into the service,
\npossibly in preference to the other candidates, then the principle of estoppel
\nwould clearly be applicable and relief of change  of  date  of  birth  can  be
\nlegitimately denied.  To that extent the decision in Manak chand case does not
\nlay down the correct law (Emphasis supplied)<\/p>\n
        8.4.  Again  in  another recent decision, namely, in State of U.P.  V.
\nGulaichi reported in (2003) 6  SCC,  the  Apex  Court  following  the  earlier
\ndecision of the Apex Court in the case of State of T.N.  v.  T.V.  Venugopalan<\/a>
\nand State  of Orissa V.  Ramanath Patnaik<\/a> held that when the entry was made in
\nthe service record and when the employee was in service he did  not  make  any
\nattempt  to have the service record corrected, any amount of evidence produced
\nsubsequently is  of  no  consequence.    The  same  view  was   expressed   in
\nR.Kirubakaran case vide 1994 Supp (1 ) SCC 155.\n<\/p>\n
        8.5.  It cannot be disputed that the above ratio laid down by the Apex
\nCourt is  squarely  applicable  to  the  petitioner’s  case.    Therefore, the
\npetitioner is not entitled to take his claim against the respondents based  on
\nthe  decree  dated  06.03.1984  made  in S.A.No.615 of 1977 and the Government
\nMemorandum G.O.M.S.No.48 Education Department 12.0 1.1987  without  impleading
\nthe respondents  as  party  to  the  proceedings.    Hence,  the issue No.2 is
\nanswered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
        91.  Issue No.3:  To what relief the petitioner is entitled to?\n<\/p>\n
        9.2.  In view of the findings of this Court in issue Nos.1 and 2, I do
\nnot see any merit in the writ petition.  The writ petition is devoid of merits
\nand the same is dismissed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
Index :Yes
\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n
sl<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.  The Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Defence,
\nSouth Block, D.H.G.  Post, New Delhi 110 011.\n<\/p>\n
2.  Military Secretary, Army Head Quarters,
\nD.H.G.  Post, New Delhi – 110 011.\n<\/p>\n
\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13\/09\/2004 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN W.P.No.1387 of 1997 Col.K.Malaippan …. Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Government of India, rep. by Secretary to Government, Ministry of Defence, South Block, D.H.G. Post, New Delhi […]<\/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-260750","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCol.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - 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\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-28T08:52:50+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-28T08:52:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\"},\"wordCount\":2074,\"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\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\",\"name\":\"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-28T08:52:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - 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\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-28T08:52:50+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004","datePublished":"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-28T08:52:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004"},"wordCount":2074,"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\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004","name":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-28T08:52:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/col-k-malaippan-vs-the-government-of-india-on-13-september-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Col.K.Malaippan vs The Government Of India on 13 September, 2004"}]},{"@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\/260750","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=260750"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260750\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260750"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260750"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260750"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}