{"id":31021,"date":"2007-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007"},"modified":"2017-12-21T14:48:58","modified_gmt":"2017-12-21T09:18:58","slug":"a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","title":{"rendered":"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 25\/09\/2007\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.CHANDRU\n\n\nWRIT PETITION (MD) Nos.1536 of 2006\nWRIT PETITION (MD) Nos.1566,\n1749, 1842, 1843, 1844, 1870,\n1897, 1898, 1911, 1951 to 1955 of 2006\n\n\nW.P.(MD)No.1536 of 2006\n\nA.Karuppaiah              \t..   \tPetitioner\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nvs.\n\n\n1.The Director General,\n  Government of India,\n  Ministry of Defence,\n  Ordinance Factory Board,\n  10-A, S.K.Bose Road,\n  Kolkatta - 700 001.\n\n2.The General Manager,\n  Ordinance Factory,\n  Trichy - 16.                \t..   \tRespondents<\/pre>\n<p>\tWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to<br \/>\nissue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of order passed by<br \/>\n2nd respondent in No.7714\/LB\/MBO dt. 28.7.2001 and quash the same.\t\t<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\n\nW.P.(MD)No.1566 and 1844 of 2006\n\nSmt.V.Indrani               \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                 \t(MD)No.1566 of 2006\n\nSmt.R.Vijayalakshmi          \t..  \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                 \t(MD)No.1844 of 2006\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\nvs.\n\n1.The Director General,\n  Government of India,\n  Ministry of Defence,\n  Ordinance Factory Board,\n  10-A, S.K.Bose Road,\n  Kolkatta - 700 001.\n\n2.The General Manager,\n  Government of India,\n  Ministry of Defence,\n  Ordinance Factory,\n  Trichy - 16.              \t..   \tRespondents\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tWrit Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to<br \/>\nissue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of order passed by<br \/>\n2nd respondent in No.7714\/LB\/DIH dt. 28.7.2001 and quash the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(MD)No.1749,1842, 1843, 1870, 1897 of 2006,<\/p>\n<p>Smt.S.Ramu                    \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.<\/p>\n<pre>\n                                   \t(MD)No.1749 of 2006\n\n\nSmt.S.Radha                   \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                   \t(MD)No.1842 of 2006\n\n\nSmt.J.Juliet                  \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                   \t(MD)No.1843 of 2006\n\n\nSmt.P.Kulanthai Therasal       \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                   \t(MD)No.1870 of 2006\n\t\n\nR.Sambandan                    \t..   \tPetitioner in W.P.\n                                   \t(MD)No.1897 of 2006\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\nvs.\n\n\n1.The Director General,\n  Ministry of Defence,\n  Ordinance Factory Board,\n  10-A, S.K.Bose Road,\n  Kolkatta - 700 001.\n\n2.The General Manager,\n  Ministry of Defence\n  Ordinance Factory,\n  Trichy - 16.                \t..   \tRespondents\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tWrit Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to<br \/>\nissue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of order passed by<br \/>\n2nd respondent in No.7714\/LB\/DIH dt. 28.7.2001 and quash the same.\t<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\nW.P.(MD)Nos.1898, 1911, 1951, 1952,\n1953, 1954 and 1955 of 2006\n\n\nK.Munusamy                  \t..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1898 of 2006\n\n\nK.Karuppasamy                  \t..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1911 of 2006\n\n\nK.Sonai                         ..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1951 of 2006\n\n\nA.E.Reeta                       ..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1952 of 2006\n\nP.Selvaraj                      ..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1953 of 2006\n\nM.Gunaseelan                   \t..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1954 of 2006\n\n\nM.Kannan                        ..   Petitioner in W.P.\n                                     (MD)No.1955 of 2006\n\n\nvs.\n\n\n1.The Director General,\n  Ordinance Factory Board,\n  Ministry of Defence,\n  10-A, S.K.Bose Road,\n  Kolkatta - 700 001.\n\n2.The General Manager,\n  Ordinance Factory,\n  Ministry of Defence\n  Trichy - 16.               \t..  \tRespondents\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tWrit Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to<br \/>\nissue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of order passed by<br \/>\n2nd respondent in No.7714\/LB\/MBO dt. 28.7.2001 and quash the same.\n<\/p>\n<pre>!For petitioners    \t...\tMr. M.Subash Babu\n\t\n\n^For respondents    \t...\tMr.P.Subbaraj\n                            \tCentral Government Counsel\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\n:COMMON ORDER\n\t\n\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tIn all these 15 Writ Petitions, the petitioners are all wait listed<br \/>\npersons kept in the list of persons eligible for employment assistance on<br \/>\naccount of the death of their near relative in harness while working the<br \/>\nemployment of the second respondent factory.  Since during the wait period,<br \/>\ntheir turn for employment never arose, by the impugned order, they were informed<br \/>\nthat there was remote possibility of their getting  employment as the list had<br \/>\nlapsed.  They were also further informed that the family pension, terminal<br \/>\nbenefits  were received from the factory was substantial,  there was no<br \/>\nnecessity to grant any employment assistance on compassionate grounds. It is<br \/>\nthis order, which is under challenge.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. All these Writ Petitions was admitted on 16.2.2006.  The respondents<br \/>\nhave also filed counter affidavits.  In each of the counter affidavit, the<br \/>\nsecond respondent had stated the details of the family members of the deceased<br \/>\nworkman as well as the quantum of the benefits available to the family on<br \/>\naccount of the death of their near relative and stated that they are not<br \/>\nentitled for any compassionate appointment and that the wait period was also<br \/>\nover.  In the counter affidavit, heavy reliance was also placed on the circular<br \/>\nissued by the Department of Personnel and Public Grievance and Pensions,<br \/>\nDepartment  of Personnel and Training (DOPT) vide letter dated 5th May 2003 in<br \/>\nref F.No.14014\/19\/2002 Estt(D).  In the light of the same, it was stated that<br \/>\nthe request of the petitioners cannot be considered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. Heard the arguments of Mr. M.Subash Babu, learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner and Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned Central Government Counsel and have<br \/>\nperused the records.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the orders have<br \/>\nbeen passed in stereo- typed letter and on that short ground, those orders are<br \/>\nliable to be set aside.  It was pointed out to him that the counter-affidavits<br \/>\nfiled by the second respondent contained detailed reasoning for the rejection of<br \/>\nthe petitioners&#8217; request.  The learned counsel took time to refute those details<br \/>\nbut the same was not forthcoming.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. In this context, it is necessary to refer to certain decisions of the<br \/>\nSupreme Court on this issue.  The Honourable Supreme Court in the decision in<br \/>\nState of Haryana Vs.Ankur Gupta reported in 2003(7) SCC 704 in para 6 held as<br \/>\nfollows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;As was observed in State of Haryana v.Rani Devi (AIR 1996 SCW 3002)it<br \/>\nneed not be pointed out that the claim of the person concerned for appointment<br \/>\non compassionate ground is based on the premise that he was dependent on the<br \/>\ndeceased employee.  Strictly, this claim cannot be upheld on the touchstone of<br \/>\nArticle 14 or 16 of the Constitution of India.  However, such claim is<br \/>\nconsidered as reasonable and permissible on the basis of sudden crisis occurring<br \/>\nin the family of such employee who has served the State and dies while in<br \/>\nservice.  That is why it is necessary for the authorities to frame rules,<br \/>\nregulations or to issue such administrative orders which can stand the test of<br \/>\nArticles 14 and 16.  Appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a<br \/>\nmatter of right.  Die-in-Harness Scheme cannot be made applicable to all types<br \/>\nof posts irrespective of the nature of service rendered by the deceased<br \/>\nemployee.  In Rani Devi case it was held that the scheme regarding appointment<br \/>\non compassionate ground if extended to all types of casual or     ad hoc<br \/>\nemployees including those who worked as apprentices cannot be justified on<br \/>\nconstitutional grounds.  <a href=\"\/doc\/1398969\/\">In LIC of India v. Asha Ramachandra Ambekar, (AIR<\/a> 1994<br \/>\nSCW 1947) it was pointed out that the High courts and Administrative Tribunals<br \/>\ncan not confer benediction impelled by sympathetic considerations to make<br \/>\nappointments on compassionate grounds when the regulations framed in respect<br \/>\nthereof do not cover and contemplate such appointments.  It was noted in Umesh<br \/>\nKumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana (AIR 1994 (4) SCC 138) that as a rule, in<br \/>\npublic service appointments should be made strictly on the basis of open<br \/>\ninvitation of applications and merit.  The appointment on compassionate ground<br \/>\nis not another source of recruitment but merely an exception to the aforesaid<br \/>\nrequirement taking into consideration the fact of the death of the employee<br \/>\nwhile in service leaving his family without any means of livelihood.  In such<br \/>\ncases the object is to enable the family to get over sudden financial crisis.<br \/>\nBut such appointments on compassionate ground have to be made in accordance with<br \/>\nthe rules, regulations or administrative instructions taking into consideration<br \/>\nthe financial condition of the family of the deceased.&#8221; [Emphasis Added]<\/p>\n<p>\t6. In fact, when a similar order based the circular of the D.O.P.T, when<br \/>\nquestioned, this Court in W.P.(MD)No.11047 of 2005 [<a href=\"\/doc\/1703310\/\">K.Krishnamoorthi v. The<br \/>\nStation Director, All India Radio, Chennai and<\/a> another], by an order dated<br \/>\n11.7.2007 rejected the said contention and it was held as follows in paragraph<br \/>\n6:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;6. It is held that the appointment on compassionate aground is an<br \/>\nexception to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and not a new<br \/>\nsource of recruitment.  The Court can only enforce the Rules, which are in<br \/>\nconformity with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.  When the<br \/>\nGovernment had framed the Rule including prescription of time limit, the Court<br \/>\nout of any sympathy cannot expand the scope of the Rule.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. In fact, the very same circular of the D.O.P.T was challenged in the<br \/>\ncase of Sivanantha Perumal, President, Tuticorin Port Deceased Employees<br \/>\nDependants Welfare Society Vs. Union of India and others vide W.P.NO.2269 of<br \/>\n2006 and the DOPT circular was upheld by judgment dated 17.9.2007.  In para 3 of<br \/>\nthe judgment, it was observed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;3. Under the impugned circular of the Central Government issued by the<br \/>\nD.O.P.T dt.5.5.2003 a time limit for consideration of the cases relating to<br \/>\nemployment assistance programme was fixed and all public  sector Boards were<br \/>\nasked to adhere to the same.  This is in accordance with the constitutional<br \/>\nscheme in the matter of employment assistance and it cannot be attacked on<br \/>\ngrounds of violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. In the present case, the respondents have considered the claim of the<br \/>\npetitioners and also kept them in the waiting list against the quota meant for<br \/>\nthe employment assistance programme, when the same did not materialise within a<br \/>\nreasonable period, their request was rejected by this Court.   It has also been<br \/>\nsatisfactorily explained the in the counter affidavit.  Hence, no case is made<br \/>\nout by the petitioners to interfere with the impugned order.  All the writ<br \/>\nPetitions are dismissed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>asvm\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Director General,<br \/>\n  Government of India,<br \/>\n  Ministry of Defence,<br \/>\n  Ordinance Factory Board,<br \/>\n  10-A, S.K.Bose Road,<br \/>\n  Kolkatta &#8211; 700 001.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The General Manager,<br \/>\n  Government of India,<br \/>\n  Ministry of Defence,<br \/>\n  Ordinance Factory,<br \/>\n  Trichy &#8211; 16.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25\/09\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.CHANDRU WRIT PETITION (MD) Nos.1536 of 2006 WRIT PETITION (MD) Nos.1566, 1749, 1842, 1843, 1844, 1870, 1897, 1898, 1911, 1951 to 1955 of 2006 W.P.(MD)No.1536 of 2006 [&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-31021","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - 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\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-21T09:18:58+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=\"8 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-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-21T09:18:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1294,\"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\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\",\"name\":\"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-21T09:18:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - 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\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-21T09:18:58+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-21T09:18:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007"},"wordCount":1294,"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\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007","name":"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-21T09:18:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-karuppaiah-vs-the-director-general-on-25-september-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.Karuppaiah vs The Director General on 25 September, 2007"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/31021","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=31021"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31021\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31021"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31021"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31021"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}