{"id":30813,"date":"2009-11-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009"},"modified":"2017-07-16T15:27:24","modified_gmt":"2017-07-16T09:57:24","slug":"r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 09\/11\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN\n\nW.P.(MD)No.8289 of 2008\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.1  of 2008\n\nR.Srinivasan                                             ...Petitioner\n\nVs.\n\n1.The State of Tamil Nadu,\n   Rep. by its Secretary,\n   Rural Development Department,\n   Panchayat Raj,\n   Chennai-9.\n\n2.The Director of Rural Development\n   and Panchayat Raj,\n   Panagal Building,\n   Saidapet,\n   Chennai-15.\n\n3.The District Collector,\n   Thanjavur District.\n\n4.The Block Development Officer,\n   Thanjavur.\n\n5.The Accountant General,\n   No.361, Anna Salai,\n   Chennai-600 018.                                      ...Respondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\nWrit Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the\nConstitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of  Certiorarified\nMandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 5th respondent in\nconnection with the order passed by him in his proceedings Po2\/3\/S316-\n1363\/RTD\/2007-2008, dated 14.01.2008 and the consequential order passed by the\n4th respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.6514\/2007 A1, dated 29.02.2008 and\nquash the same and direct the respondents to count half of the service of the\npetitioner from 01.06.1972 to 11.08.1999 for the purpose of payment of all the\nterminal benefit including the commutation of pension, pension arrears and\nmonthly pension with 18% of interest per annum.\n\n!For Petitioner             ...  Mrs.J.Nisha Banu\n^For  respondents 1 to 3    ...  Mr.R.Balasubramanian\n                                 Additional Government Pleader\nFor 4th respondent          ...  Mr.K.M.Vijaiyakumar\nFor 5th respondent          ...  Mr.Gunasekaran\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tHeard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.The petitioner was selected for appointment to the post of part time<br \/>\nPanchayat Clerk on 01.06.1972 and was regularly appointed as Panchayat Assistant<br \/>\nfrom 01.01.1991.  Later, he was appointed as Rural Welfare Officer, Grade III on<br \/>\n07.08.1999 in the Thanjavur Panchayat Union and joined service on 11.08.1999 and<br \/>\nthen promoted to the post of Assistant on 07.06.2007 and retired on 31.10.2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.According to the petitioner, his service as a Part time Panchayat Clerk<br \/>\nfrom 01.06.1972 to 30.12.1990 has to be considered for calculating the pension<br \/>\nand if so, calculated he is eligible to claim pension.  But the 5th respondent,<br \/>\nby his proceedings, dated 14.01.2008 has stated that the total non-qualifying<br \/>\nservice of the petitioner is 8 years 2 months and 21 days and therefore, the<br \/>\npetitioner is not entitled to any pension as he has not completed 10 years of<br \/>\nservice, which is the minimum required for claiming pension and on the basis of<br \/>\nthe proceedings of the 5th respondent, the 4th respondent passed the impugned<br \/>\norder stating that the petitioner is not  entitled to pension and this order is<br \/>\nchallenged in this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.The 3rd and 5th respondent filed their counter statement and contended<br \/>\nthat the period of service of the petitioner prior to 01.01.1991 cannot be<br \/>\nconsidered for calculating the pension and the petitioner is not entitled to any<br \/>\npension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.Mrs.J.Nisha Banu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner<br \/>\nsubmitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department, dated 14th<br \/>\nFebruary 1996, half of the service rendered by State Government employee under<br \/>\nnon-pensionable establishment shall be counted for pensionary benefits along<br \/>\nwith regular service under pensionable establishment and this court has held in<br \/>\nW.P.No.39080 of 2006, dated 25.03.2009 that as per the G.O.Ms.No.437, Finance<br \/>\n(Pension) Department, dated 23.06.1988, benefits were extended to the local<br \/>\nbodies also following the judgment reported in (2006)4  MLJ 1027 <a href=\"\/doc\/1757611\/\">(K.Sampath v.<br \/>\nState of Tamil Nadu and<\/a> confirmed in W.A.(MD)No.335 of 2007, dated 11.07.2008,<br \/>\ngranted pension to the petitioner in that case, who was an employee of the<br \/>\nvillage panchayat, by calculating 10 years of service rendered by him in the<br \/>\nvillage panchayat, for the purpose of countering the pension service.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mrs.Nisha Banu relied<br \/>\nupon the judgment rendered in W.P.No.5017 of 2008, dated 02.04.2009 wherein<br \/>\nsimilar order was passed.  Therefore, the learned counsel argued that service<br \/>\nrendered by the petitioner as part time employee as Panchayat Clerk from<br \/>\n01.06.1972 to 30.12.1990 has to be taken into consideration and as per the<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.437, 50% of that period is to be taken into consideration and if so<br \/>\nconstrued, the petitioner is eligible for pension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.Mr.P.Gunasekaran, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent,<br \/>\nsubmitted that the contention canvassed by the learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\npetitioner is against the provisions of Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules<br \/>\n1928.  The learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent, Mr.Gunasekaran,<br \/>\ncontended that as per Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, in case of<br \/>\nGovernment servant retiring on or after 1.10.1969 rendering continuous,<br \/>\ntemporary or officiating service in a pensionable post, whether rendered in a<br \/>\nregular capacity or not, shall count in full as qualifying service, even if it<br \/>\nis not followed by confirmation.  However, Government subsequently amended Rule<br \/>\n11 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 through G.O.Ms.No.283, Finance<br \/>\n(Pension) Department, dated 15.04.1996 whereby sub rule (2) was added to Rule<br \/>\n11, which states that, half of the service paid from contingencies shall be<br \/>\nallowed to count towards qualifying service for pension along with regular<br \/>\nservice subject to the following conditions:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[i]Service paid from contingencies shall be in a job involving whole time<br \/>\nemployment and not part-time for a portion of the day.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[ii]Service paid from contingencies shall be in a type of work or job for<br \/>\nwhich regular posts could have been sanctioned, for example Chowkidar.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[iii]Service shall be for which the payment is made out on monthly or<br \/>\ndaily rates computed and paid on a monthly basis and which, though not analogous<br \/>\nto the regular scale of pay, shall bear some relation in the matter of pay to<br \/>\nthose being paid for similar jobs being performed by staff in regular<br \/>\nestablishments.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[iv]Service paid from contingencies shall be continuous and followed by<br \/>\nabsorption in regular employment without a brake.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[v]subject to the above conditions being fulfilled the weighage for past<br \/>\nService paid from contingencies shall be limited to the period after the January<br \/>\n1961 for which authentic records of Service may be available.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t[vi]Pension or revised pension admissible as the case shall be paid from<br \/>\nthe 23rd June 1998.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.Further as per Rule 43(2) of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978, a Government<br \/>\nServant retiring in accordance with the provisions of these Rules, after<br \/>\ncompleting qualifying Service of not less than 10 years, shall be eligible for<br \/>\npension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.Further he submitted that Government had clarified, in letter<br \/>\nNo.10963\/Pension\/2000-1 Finance (Pension)Department, dated 04.10.2000 that<br \/>\nService rendered in Village Panchayats, Panchayat Boards cannot be counted as<br \/>\nqualifying Service for pension.  In view of the Government&#8217;s above<br \/>\nclarification, the action of this respondent in not reckoning the Service<br \/>\nrendered under Village Panchayat from 1.1.91 to 10.08.99 is in order and as per<br \/>\nrules.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent<br \/>\nsubmitted that the Service rendered by the petitioner as Panchayat Clerk was on<br \/>\na part time basis and hence, dose not satisfy the 1st condition of the amended<br \/>\nRule 11(2) of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, whereby the Service paid from<br \/>\ncontingencies shall be in a job involving whole time employment and not part<br \/>\ntime for a portion of the day.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.According to me, there is no need  to go into the earlier judgments<br \/>\ncited by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner or objections raised<br \/>\nby the learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent. It has been brought to<br \/>\nmy notice by Mrs.Nisha Banu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner<br \/>\nthat G.O.Ms.408, Finance (Pension), dated 25.08.2009, by which the service of<br \/>\nthose employees, who were employed on consolidated pay or on daily wages or on<br \/>\nhonorarium  were regularised earlier to 01.04.2003 are also entitled to<br \/>\ncalculate 50% of the Service in that category for calculating pension benefits<br \/>\nand therefore, as per the aforesaid G.O., the petitioner is entitled to<br \/>\ncalculate 50% of the Service  viz., during the period from 1.6.1972 to 31.12.90.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.Further, it is seen from the aforesaid G.O. that the said G.O. was<br \/>\nissued having regard to Rule 11(2) of of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978 and<br \/>\nTamil Nadu Pension Rule 1978 was suitably amended as per the said G.O.<br \/>\nTherefore, as per the earlier judgments of this court and as per the<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.408, dated 25.08.2009, the petitioner is entitled to calculate his 50<br \/>\n% of the Service from 01.06.1972 to 30.12.1990 and if so calculated, the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s Service would be more than 10 years and is eligible to be<br \/>\nconsidered for pension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13.Hence, the impugned order passed by the respondents 4 and 5 are set<br \/>\naside and accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. The respondents are directed to<br \/>\nconsider the case of the petitioner and sanction pension in the light of the<br \/>\njudgment of this court and also on the basis of G.O.Ms.408, Finance (Pension),<br \/>\ndated 25.08.2009,<\/p>\n<p>er<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Secretary,<br \/>\n   Government of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\n   Rural Development Department,<br \/>\n   Panchayat Raj,<br \/>\n   Chennai-9.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Director of Rural Development<br \/>\n   and Panchayat Raj,<br \/>\n   Panagal Building,<br \/>\n   Saidapet,<br \/>\n   Chennai-15.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The District Collector,<br \/>\n   Thanjavur District.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Block Development Officer,<br \/>\n   Thanjavur.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The Accountant General,<br \/>\n   No.361, Anna Salai,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 018.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.The Additional Government Pleader,<br \/>\n   Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,<br \/>\n   Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09\/11\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN W.P.(MD)No.8289 of 2008 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2008 R.Srinivasan &#8230;Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Panchayat Raj, Chennai-9. [&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-30813","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>R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - 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\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-16T09:57:24+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\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-16T09:57:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1276,\"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\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\",\"name\":\"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-16T09:57:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 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":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - 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\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-16T09:57:24+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\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-16T09:57:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009"},"wordCount":1276,"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\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009","name":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-16T09:57:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-srinivasan-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Srinivasan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 November, 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\/30813","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=30813"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30813\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30813"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30813"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30813"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}