{"id":261900,"date":"2008-08-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008"},"modified":"2015-11-24T19:36:42","modified_gmt":"2015-11-24T14:06:42","slug":"mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                                                       Appeal No.2590 to 2597\/ICPB\/2008\n                                                                   F.No.PBC\/07\/477, 501\n                                                                      PBA\/08\/61, 88, 369\n                                                                       PBC\/08\/26, 27, 28\n                                                                          August 5, 2008\n\n       In the matter of Right to <a href=\"\/doc\/1965344\/\" id=\"a_1\">Information Act<\/a>, 2005 - <a href=\"\/doc\/1210983\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 18<\/a>\/<a href=\"\/doc\/19543\/\" id=\"a_2\">19<\/a>\n   [Hearing on 21.7.2008 through Video Conferencing between New Delhi-Puducherry-Yanam at 10.30 a.m.]\n\n\nAppellant :           Mr. P. Veerappan\n\nPublic authority: Administrative Reform Wing\n                  Mr. G.M. Rao, Superintendent (ARW) &amp; CPIO\n                  Mr. Rakesh Behari, Chief Secretary &amp; Appellate Authority\n\nPresent:              For Respondents:<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">                      Mr. V. Madhuvanan, JS (ARW)<br \/>\n                      Mr. G.M. Durga Rao, Supdt. (ARW)<\/p>\n<p>                      Mr. P. Verrappan-Appellant<\/p>\n<p>                                           DECISION<\/p>\n<p>      These appeals filed by the appellant against the decision of the public<br \/>\nauthorities of Department of Administrative Reforms Wing, Government of<br \/>\nPuducherry, Puducherry have been taken together for hearing through<br \/>\nVideo Conferencing on 21.7.2008, which was attended by the respondent<br \/>\nfrom Puducherry. The appellant attended the hearing from Yanam. After<br \/>\ngoing through the RTI applications and replies received in the matter and<br \/>\nafter deliberations of the matters in the hearing, the matters are discussed<br \/>\nand disposed of as under:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/028: The appellant by his RTI application<br \/>\ndated 14.7.2007 addressed to the Joint Secretary, AR Wing requested<br \/>\ninformation regarding action taken by the then State Information<br \/>\nCommission on his complaint petitions filed under <a href=\"\/doc\/1083556\/\" id=\"a_3\">section 18<\/a> of RTI Act.<br \/>\nHe has given petitions against seven different departments. During the<br \/>\nhearing, the public authority explained that the appellant instead of<br \/>\napproaching the State Information Commission at that time he has filed<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                                   1<\/span><br \/>\n petition before AR Wing. The then PIO has transferred these applications<br \/>\nto the State Commission. Due to the subsequent winding up of the State<br \/>\nCommission the appellant could not get the particulars. However, they<br \/>\naddressed the Departments concerned to furnish information directly to the<br \/>\nappellant. They stated that they have asked the appellant to give the copies<br \/>\nof complaint, which the appellant did not oblige. However, the appellant<br \/>\ninsisted that he has addressed the application to one public authority as per<br \/>\nrules and he stated that the information should have been maintained by<br \/>\nthem. It is felt the appellant could not seek information from AR Wing.<br \/>\nAfter perusing the records, it is decided that the appellant should forward<br \/>\ncopy of these complaints directly to the Departments. In case if he files<br \/>\nsuch copies, they should give reply within 15 days from the date of receipt<br \/>\nof this decision. It is also directed that the CPIO should forward this<br \/>\ndecision to all the public authorities independently.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">      File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/027: The appellant by his RTI application<br \/>\ndated 14.7.2007 requested the PIO for the region-wise list of offices having<br \/>\ncomputer facilities in the U.T. of Puducherry. He has also requested for the<br \/>\nregion-wise STD phone facilities provided to different offices. The<br \/>\nrepresentative of the Department have stated that the application of the<br \/>\nappellant has been transferred to the respective departments where<br \/>\ninformation is available with instructions to give information directly to the<br \/>\nappellant under <a href=\"\/doc\/666037\/\" id=\"a_4\">section 6(3)<\/a> of RTI Act and they claimed that the appellant<br \/>\nhimself accepted that he has received reply from many of these<br \/>\ndepartments. It is decided the appellant should give the names of the<br \/>\ndepartments from where he is yet to receive and in case if he gives one<br \/>\nsuch list, they should be asked to give reply within 15 days from the date of<br \/>\nreceipt of this decision.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">      File No.CIC\/PBC\/2008\/026: The appeal is closed as the requisite<br \/>\ninformation has already been given as per the provisions of the <a href=\"\/doc\/671631\/\" id=\"a_5\">RTI Act<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">      File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/477: In this appeal, the appellant wanted to<br \/>\nhave the list of persons who have obtained jobs in Government and semi-<br \/>\ngovt. offices under ex-service man quota, sportsman quota, physically<br \/>\nhandicapped quota and compassionate appointment quota etc. The<br \/>\nappellant wanted the details of name, address, date of appointment and<br \/>\nvarious other details in respect of group &#8216;c&#8221; and group &#8216;d&#8217; posts. The<br \/>\nrespondent has transferred this application to the respective departments.<br \/>\nSome of them have given reply. During the hearing the appellant has<br \/>\nstated that the information is very much available with the AR Wing of<br \/>\nPuducherry Government. However, public authority has denied such<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                      2<\/span><br \/>\n contention telling that the appellant has asked particulars regarding Group<br \/>\nC &amp; D posts only, whereas the details regarding the Ministerial posts only<br \/>\navailable with AR Wing. Every Department is expected to maintain roaster<br \/>\npoint. Considering the above, it is decided that the appellant should<br \/>\nindicate the departments from where he is yet to receive complete<br \/>\ninformation and the CPIO is directed to re-check with those departments<br \/>\nand provide the requisite information within 15 days from the date of receipt<br \/>\nof this decision.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">       File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/188: In this appeal, the appellant by his RTI<br \/>\napplication dated 27.11.2007 has sought for the updated list of PIOs and<br \/>\nAAs in Poindicherry U.T. Administration. During the hearing the appellant<br \/>\nhas stated that he has not been given with the complete information. The<br \/>\nrepresentatives of the AR Wing have stated that the each public authority is<br \/>\nappointing their PIOs and AAs directly after getting the approval of the<br \/>\nAdministrative Secretary concerned. A consolidated list has already been<br \/>\nsupplied to the appellant and it is on the website also. However, they stated<br \/>\nthat some particulars like e-mail ID etc. are yet to be updated. In view of<br \/>\nthis, it is felt that since the Administrative Department gives approval of<br \/>\nappointment of PIOs and AAs, it should have a consolidated list with them.<br \/>\nHence, it is directed that the CPIO should make arrangements for updating<br \/>\nthe list as well as the website and give a copy afresh to the appellant within<br \/>\n15 days from the date of receipt of this decision.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">      File No. CIC\/PBC\/2007\/501: In this appeal, the appellant vide his RTI<br \/>\napplication dated 19.4.2007 has requested for various details about the<br \/>\nconstitution of State Information Commission. Vide letter dated 30.4.2007,<br \/>\nthe appellant was requested to pay certain fee to collect the information<br \/>\nand the information could not be provided as the fee has not been<br \/>\ndeposited. Since the time has lapsed and the State Commission has since<br \/>\nbeen wound up, It is directed the CPIO should provide the available<br \/>\ninformation to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this<br \/>\ndecision.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">      File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/061: In this appeal the appellant by his letter<br \/>\ndated 17.10.2007 has requested for the action taken on his representation<br \/>\nto the Lt. Governor of Puducherry in connection with collection of fee for<br \/>\nRTI first appeals under <a href=\"\/doc\/671631\/\" id=\"a_6\">RTI Act<\/a>. Vide letter dated 25.10.2007, the PS to Lt.<br \/>\nGovernor has informed the appellant about the status of the representation.<br \/>\nHowever, during the hearing, it transpired, that the rules have now been<br \/>\namended w.e.f. 18.2.2008. Till that date they have been charging. After<br \/>\n18.2.2008 they have stopped charging for filing appeal. The appellant is<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">                                      3<\/span><br \/>\n aggrieved that only after his filing of this complaint the Government of<br \/>\nPuducherry has amended the rules.              In view of the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances, though nothing could be done for the fees already<br \/>\ncollected, it is directed that if any fee has been collected after 18.2.2008,<br \/>\nthe same should refunded to the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">       File No. CIC\/PBC\/2008\/369: In this appeal, the appellant by his RTI<br \/>\napplication dated 14.7.2007 has requested for various personal information<br \/>\nlike the list of government servants having passport, list of govt. servants<br \/>\nwho have changed their religion and list of husband &amp; wives who are<br \/>\nworking in Pondicherry etc. This information cannot be given as it is<br \/>\npertaining to other individuals and hence it is rightly denied under <a href=\"\/doc\/223928\/\" id=\"a_7\">section<br \/>\n8(1)(j)<\/a> of RTI Act. Hence, the appeal is rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">     On the above lines all 8 appeals stand disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">     Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">                                                                      Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">                                                 (Padma Balasubramanian)<br \/>\n                                          Central Information Commissioner<br \/>\nAuthenticated true copy :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">(Prem Singh Sagar)<br \/>\nUnder Secretary &amp; Assistant Registrar<\/p>\n<p>Address of parties :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">1.   Mr. G.M. Rao, Superintendent (ARW) &amp; CPIO, Administrative Reform<br \/>\n     Wing, Puducherry.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">2.   Mr. Rakesh Behari, Chief Secretary &amp; Appellate Authority,<br \/>\n     Administrative Reform Wing, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">3.   Mr. P. Veerappan, No. 6, 132\/11, K.V. Sub Station Quarters,<br \/>\n     Mettacur, Yanam-533464 (Puducherry)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">                                     4<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.2590 to 2597\/ICPB\/2008 F.No.PBC\/07\/477, 501 PBA\/08\/61, 88, 369 PBC\/08\/26, 27, 28 August 5, 2008 In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 &#8211; Section 18\/19 [Hearing on 21.7.2008 through Video Conferencing between New Delhi-Puducherry-Yanam at 10.30 [&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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-261900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - 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\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-24T14:06:42+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\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-24T14:06:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1272,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-24T14:06:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - 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\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-24T14:06:42+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\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-24T14:06:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008"},"wordCount":1272,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008","name":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform ... on 5 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-24T14:06:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-p-veerappan-vs-administrative-reform-on-5-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr. P. Veerappan vs Administrative Reform &#8230; on 5 August, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261900","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=261900"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261900\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=261900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=261900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=261900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}