{"id":37158,"date":"2006-08-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-08-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006"},"modified":"2014-04-15T06:24:59","modified_gmt":"2014-04-15T00:54:59","slug":"coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","title":{"rendered":"Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 31\/08\/2006\n\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR\n\n\nWrit Petition(MD)Nos.6581 of 2006\nWrit Petition(MD)Nos.6864, 7391, 7433 and 7523 of 2006\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.6581 of 2006,\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.6864 of 2006,\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.7391 of 2006,\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.7433 of 2006 and\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.7523 of 2006,\n\n\n\nS.Chandrasekaran.     \t... \tPetitioner W.P.(MD)No.6581 of 2006\n\nP.Poongothai,         \t... \tPetitioner W.P.(MD)No.6864 of 2006\n\nN.Venugopal           \t... \tPetitioner W.P.(MD)No.7391 of 2006\n\nT.Radha Krishnan      \t... \tPetitioner W.P.(MD)No.7433 of 2006\n\nVeeragnanalakshmi     \t... \tPetitioner W.P.(MD)No.7523 of 2006\n\n\nVs\n\n\nThe District Collector and Chairman\nDistrict Level Vigilance Committee,\nTirunelveli District.\n\n\t\t\t... \tRespondent in all the W.Ps.<\/pre>\n
\tWrit Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
\npraying for the issuance of  writ of certiorari calling for the records relating
\nto the proceedings of the respondent in NA.KA.A4\/77788\/05, dated 5.7.2006;
\nA4\/76862\/2005, dated 7.7.2006; A4\/14508\/2004, dated 26.7.2006; A4\/12778\/2006,
\ndated 26.7.2006 and NA.KA.A4\/77785\/05, dated 3.7.2006 respectively and quash the
\nsame.\n<\/p>\n
!For petitioner in
\nall Writ Petitions \t…\tMr.M.Suresh Kumar\t<\/p>\n
^For respondent in
\nWrit Petition Nos.<\/p>\n
\n6581, 6864, 7433,\nand 7523 of 2006   \t...\tMr.K.Balasubramanian,\n\t\t\t     \tAdditional Government Pleader\n\nFor respondent in\nWrit Petition No.\n7391 of 2006       \t...\tMr.D.Sasikumar,\n\t\t             \tGovernment Advocate.\n\n\n:COMMON ORDER\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
\tWrit Petitions are filed praying for the issuance of  writ of certiorari
\ncalling for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent in
\nNA.KA.A4\/77788\/05, dated 5.7.2006; A4\/76862\/2005, dated 7.7.2006; A4\/14508\/2004,
\ndated 26.7.2006; A4\/12778\/2006, dated 26.7.2006 and NA.KA.A4\/77785\/05, dated
\n3.7.2006 respectively and quash the same.\n<\/p>\n
\t2. Heard both sides.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.  Since all the five writ petitions are filed against the  notices
\nissued to verify the bona fides of community certificates issued and the prayer
\nin all the writ petitions are to quash the said notices, all the five writ
\npetitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.  W.P.No.6581 of 2006:-  The claim of the petitioner is that he belongs
\nto Hindu Konda Reddy Community, which is a Scheduled Tribe under the
\nConstitution of India (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, passed by the President by
\nvirtue of the powers conferred under Article 342 of the Constitution.  The
\npetitioner obtained a community certificate in the year, 1977.  During the year
\n1988, on the basis of certain complaint,  proceedings were initiated by the
\nauthorities and the community certificate was cancelled and the same was
\nchallenged before the Court in W.P.No.1257 of 2001.  By order dated 26.7.2005,
\nthe Principal Bench of  Madras High Court set aside the order cancelling the
\ncommunity certificate in view of   Committee constituted in terms of
\nG.O.Ms.No.111 ADW-10 dated 6.7.2005.  Thereafter a notice was  issued by the
\nrespondent on 19.9.2005 calling upon the petitioner to offer his explanation.
\nAfter exchange of correspondence, the  impugned communication dated 5.7.2006 has
\nbeen issued by the respondent calling for explanation alone. There is no
\nindication that a personal hearing would be given before deciding the issue.
\nAccording to the petitioner, the notice is contrary to the directions issued by
\nthe Apex Court in Maduri Patil – vs. – Additional Commissioner, Tribal
\nDevelopment reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court 94.  The learned counsel for the
\npetitioner would plead that inasmuch as the impugned notice only directs the
\npetitioner to submit his explanation without providing an opportunity or
\npersonal hearing, prejudice will be caused to the petitioner and therefore, the
\nwrit petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.  W.P.No.6864 of 2006:-  The claim of the petitioner is that she belongs
\nto Hindu Konda Reddy Community, which is a Scheduled Tribe under the
\nConstitution of India (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, passed by the President by
\nvirtue of the powers conferred under Article 342 of the Constitution.  The
\npetitioner obtained a community certificate in the year, 1976.  During the year
\n1985, on the basis of certain complaint,  proceedings were initiated by the
\nauthorities and the community certificate was cancelled by a Two Member District
\nLevel Committee and disciplinary proceedings were taken.  Hence the same was
\nchallenged before the Court in W.P.No.13206 of 2001. The Principal Bench of
\nMadras High Court by order dated 27.7.2005 held that the matter should be
\ndecided by the  Committee constituted in terms of G.O.Ms.No.111 ADW-10 dated
\n6.7.2005.  Thereafter a notice has been issued by the respondent on 7.7.2006 to
\nthe petitioner calling upon her to offer her explanation alone.  There was no
\nindication that a personal hearing would be given before deciding the issue.
\nAccording to the petitioner, the notice is contrary to the directions issued by
\nthe  Apex Court in Maduri Patil – vs. – Additional Commissioner, Tribal
\nDevelopment reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court 94.  The learned counsel for the
\npetitioner would plead that inasmuch as the impugned notice only directs the
\npetitioner to submit her explanation without providing an opportunity for
\npersonal hearing, prejudice will be caused to the petitioner and therefore the
\nwrit petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. W.P.No.7391 of 2006:-  The claim of the petitioner is that he belongs
\nto Hindu Konda Reddy Community, which is a Scheduled Tribe under the
\nConstitution of India (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, passed by the President by
\nvirtue of the powers conferred under Article 342 of the Constitution.  The
\npetitioner obtained a community certificate in the year, 1973.  During the year
\n1996, on the basis of certain complaint,  proceedings were initiated by the
\nauthorities and the community certificate was cancelled on 25.12.2003 by the Two
\nMember District Level Committee and the same was  challenged before the Court in
\nW.P.No.676 of 2004.  A Division Bench by order dated 26.7.2005 held that the
\nmatter should be decided by the  Committee constituted in terms of G.O.Ms.No.111
\nADW-10 dated 6.7.2005.  Thereafter a notice has been issued by the respondent on
\n6.10.2005 to the petitioner calling upon him to offer his explanation alone.
\nThere was no indication that a personal hearing would be given before deciding
\nthe issue.  Another communication dated 27.2.2006 was also issued calling upon
\nthe petitioner to submit his explanation alone and there was no indication that
\na personal hearing would be given in terms of the decision of the Apex Court in
\nMaduri Patil – vs. – Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR
\n1995 Supreme Court 94.  Learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that
\nin this case the notice issued on 27.2.2006 was challenged in W.P.No.2509 of
\n2006 and this Court passed the following order on 22.3.2006:-\n<\/p>\n
\t“11. On a perusal of the above enquiry notices, it is seen that the Member
\nSecretary, District Vigilance Committee and District Adi Dravidar and Tribal
\nWelfare Officer, issued enquiry notices for verification of the caste
\ncertificate by fixing the date for personal hearing and also the venue and time.
\nThe individual is instructed to appear before the Committee for enquiry with all
\nthe relevant original documents.  In the impugned notice, no such date, time or
\nvenue is fixed for personal hearing of the petitioner.  Without fixing the date,
\ntime and venue for personal hearing, it may not be possible for the petitioner
\nto make effective representation to put forth his case before the District Level
\nVigilance Committee.  Under such circumstances, the impugned notice cannot be
\nsustained.\n<\/p>\n
\t12. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned notice of the respondent dated
\n27.2.2006 is quashed.  The respondent is directed to issue fresh notice as
\nissued by the other District Level Vigilance Committee by fixing date,time and
\nvenue and directing the individual to appear before the Committee on a
\nparticular date for personal enquiry with all the relevant original documents.
\nAfter issuing such notice, the respondent is directed to proceed the matter in
\naccordance with law.  The writ petition is ordered accordingly.  No costs.
\nConsequently, connected W.P.M.P. is closed as unnecessary.”\n<\/p>\n
Inspite of the specific direction of this Court, the present impugned notice
\ndated 26.7.2006 has been issued indicating that the petitioner should submit his
\nexplanation within 15 days.  However, there is no indication with regard to
\npersonal hearing.   Hence the writ petition has been filed.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.  W.P.No.7433 of 2006:-  The claim of the petitioner is that he belongs
\nto Hindu Konda Reddy Community, which is a Scheduled Tribe under the
\nConstitution of India (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, passed by the President by
\nvirtue of the powers conferred under Article 342 of the Constitution.  The
\npetitioner obtained a community certificate in the year, 1977.  During the year
\n1990, on the basis of certain complaint,  proceedings were initiated by the
\nauthorities and the community certificate was cancelled on 26.8.2003 by the Two
\nMember District Level Committee.  The same was  challenged before the Court in
\nW.P.No.24618 of 2003 and this court remitted the matter back to  appropriate
\ncommittee at State Level.  Thereafter, the petitioner preferred appeal to the
\nState Level Committee.   The State Level Committee remitted the matter to the
\nDistrict Level Committee constituted in terms of G.O.Ms.No.111 ADW-10 dated
\n6.7.2005.  Thereafter the present impugned  notice dated 26.7.2006  was issued
\nby the respondent to the petitioner to offer his explanation within 15 days.
\nHowever, personal hearing was not granted.    According to the petitioner, it is
\ncontrary to the directions issued by the Apex Court in Maduri Patil – vs. –
\nAdditional Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court\n<\/p>\n
94.  The learned counsel for the petitioner would plead that inasmuch as the
\nimpugned notice only directs the petitioner to submit his explanation without
\nproviding an opportunity for personal hearing, prejudice will be caused to the
\npetitioner and therefore the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.  W.P.No.7523 of 2006:-  The claim of the petitioner is that she belongs
\nto Hindu Konda Reddy Community, which is a Scheduled Tribe under the
\nConstitution of India (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, passed by the President by
\nvirtue of the powers conferred under Article 342 of the Constitution.  The
\npetitioner obtained a community certificate in the year, 1982.  During the year
\n2000, on the basis of certain complaint,  proceedings were initiated by the
\nauthorities and the community certificate was cancelled on 26.6.2000 by the Two
\nMember District Level Committee and the same was  challenged before the
\nPrincipal Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.No.12481 of 2000 which  was
\ndismissed.  As against the same Writ Appeal in W.A.No.1521 of 2005  was filed
\nand a Division Bench  by order dated 1.8.2005 allowed the writ appeal and
\ndirected the Three Member Committee constituted in terms of G.O.Ms.No.111\/ADW-10
\ndated 6.7.2005 to scrutinise the certificate.  Thereafter the petitioner
\nreceived a notice dated 21.12.2005 to offer her explanation and the petitioner
\nsought for time.  Thereafter, the respondent issued the present impugned
\ncommunication  dated 3.7.2006 calling upon the petitioner  to offer her
\nexplanation alone.   There is no indication in the said impugned communication
\nthat personal hearing will be given to the petitioner before deciding the issue.
\nThe grievance of the petitioner is that the notice without giving opportunity of
\npersonal hearing is contrary to the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in
\nMaduri Patil – vs. – Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR
\n1995 Supreme Court 94.  The learned counsel for the petitioner would plead that
\ninasmuch as the impugned notice only provides for submitting explanation without
\nproviding an opportunity for personal hearing, prejudice will be caused to the
\npetitioner and therefore the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.  The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the District
\nLevel Vigilance Committee, Tirunelveli District alone is in the habit of
\nrefusing to grant a personal hearing, whereas in respect of other District Level
\nVigilance Committees, personal hearing is being granted.  The grievance of the
\npetitioner’s in all the writ petitions is that if an opportunity is given, they
\ncould explain their case with all material particulars.  He further submit that
\nthe cancellation of community certificate will lead to serious consequences and
\nthe  life of the petitioners will be seriously  affected.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.  The Apex Court in Maduri Patil – vs. – Additional Commissioner,
\nTribal Development reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court 94 has held in paragraph 8
\nthus:-\n<\/p>\n
\t“8.  Notice contemplated in para 6 should be issued to the
\nparents\/guardian also in case candidate is minor to appear before the Committee
\nwith all evidence in his or their support of the claim for the social status
\ncertificates.”\n<\/p>\n
The Apex Court has clearly indicated that a reasonable opportunity should be
\ngiven to appear before the Committee.  Further there is a  direction of this
\nCourt to give a personal hearing as set out supra.  Such order has not been
\nappealed against and has become final and binding on the respondent.  Therefore,
\nit has become  necessary that the respondent should consider the earlier orders
\nof this Court and grant personal hearing to the petitioners.  At this stage this
\nCourt finds that no useful purpose will be served  by quashing the notices which
\nhave called upon the petitioners to submit their explanations.   Even after
\nsubmitting the explanations, the petitioners could have asked for personal
\nhearing and the authorities are bound to provide a personal hearing.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.  Therefore, in  view of the decision cited above and in order to meet
\nthe requirement of natural justice, it would suffice if an opportunity of
\npersonal hearing is granted before the matters are decided on merits.  There is
\nan earlier order of this  Court directing the respondent herein to grant a
\npersonal hearing.  Such direction is accepted and no appeal has been filed
\nagainst that order.  Therefore, the respondent could have clearly  indicated in
\nthe notice that a personal hearing would be given after receipt of reply to the
\nnotice.  If such indication has been given in the notice, the petitioner would
\nnot have come  to this Court.  The authority should bear in mind that a failure
\non their part to indicate about the  personal hearing, has delayed whole process
\nof scrutiny of the community certificate, which could have been avoided.  The
\nCourts are already  clogged with large number of cases,  unnecessary litigation
\ncan be avoided if there is some application of mind by the departmental
\nauthorities before issuing a notice of this nature.  Therefore, without setting
\naside the impugned notice, there will be a direction to the respondent to afford
\na personal hearing to the petitioners on their submitting the explanation.  The
\nrespective petitioners in all the cases will submit their explanations on or
\nbefore 22.9.2006.  Thereafter, the respondent is directed to issue notice of
\npersonal hearing giving  at least 15 days clear notice to the petitioners while
\nfixing the date of personal hearing.\n<\/p>\n
\t12.  With the above directions, all the five writ petitions are disposed
\nof.  No costs.  Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions  are closed.\n<\/p>\n
ts.\n<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
The District Collector and Chairman
\nDistrict Level Vigilance Committee,
\nTirunelveli District.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31\/08\/2006 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition(MD)Nos.6581 of 2006 Writ Petition(MD)Nos.6864, 7391, 7433 and 7523 of 2006 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in W.P.(MD)No.6581 of 2006, M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2006 in […]<\/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-37158","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCoram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - 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\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Coram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-15T00:54:59+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-15T00:54:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\"},\"wordCount\":2249,\"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\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\",\"name\":\"Coram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-15T00:54:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Coram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - 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\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Coram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-15T00:54:59+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006","datePublished":"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-15T00:54:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006"},"wordCount":2249,"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\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006","name":"Coram vs The District Collector And ... on 31 August, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-15T00:54:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/coram-vs-the-district-collector-and-on-31-august-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Coram vs The District Collector And … on 31 August, 2006"}]},{"@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\/37158","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=37158"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37158\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37158"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37158"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37158"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}