{"id":50175,"date":"2004-08-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-08-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004"},"modified":"2019-02-18T00:18:25","modified_gmt":"2019-02-17T18:48:25","slug":"state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","title":{"rendered":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 20\/08\/2004\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA\n\nAND\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA\n\nWRIT PETITION NO.3131 OF 2003\n\n1. State of Tamil Nadu,\n   represented by the Secretary,\n   Ministry of Home,\n   Fort St. George, Chennai 9.\n\n2. The Director General of Police,\n   Chennai 4.\n\n3. The Chairman,\n   Tamilnadu Uniformed Services\n     Recruitment Board,\n   No.807, II Floor,\n   Anna Salai, Chennai 2.               ..  Petitioners\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. A. Elangovan,\n   S\/o. A. Iyyasamy\n   Gr.I. PC 7518, Central Crime Branch,\n   Egmore, Chennai 8.\n\n2. The Registrar,\n   Tamilnadu Administrative Tribunal,\n   Chennai.                             ..  Respondents\n        Petition  filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the\nissuance of Writ of Certiorari as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioners :  Mr.P.S.  Sivashanmuga Sundaram\n\nFor Respondents :  Mr.G.  Thangavel\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>        The  present  writ petition has been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\nrepresented by its Secretary, Home Department, the Director General of  Police<br \/>\nand the Chairman of Tamilnadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board against the<br \/>\norder  dated  11.7.2002  passed  by  the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in<br \/>\nO.A.No.6443 of 1998 allowing the said application filed by the Respondent No.1<br \/>\nand  directing  the  present  petitioners  to  give  posting  to  the  present<br \/>\nRespondent No.1 as  Sub-Inspector of Police.  2.  The facts giving rise to the<br \/>\npresent writ petition are as follows :The present Respondent No.1 was  serving<br \/>\nunder  the  present  petitioners as Constable and in course of time, he became<br \/>\nGrade-I Constable.  The post of Sub-Inspector of Police is filled up by direct<br \/>\nrecruitment and also by  promotion.    Initially,  the  Head  Constables  were<br \/>\neligible  to  be promoted, but subsequently, the State Government introduced a<br \/>\nscheme under which Head Constables and Grade-I constables become  eligible  to<br \/>\nbe appointed  as  Sub-Inspector  on  the  basis  of  selection on merit.  Such<br \/>\nprinciple has been laid down by  the  Government  in  G.O.Ms.    No.1054  Home<br \/>\n(Police.III) Department  dated  13.7.1995.    Such  G.O., provided that direct<br \/>\nrecruitment of Sub-Inspectors of Police should be filled up at 80%  from  open<br \/>\nmarket and  20% from serving police personnel in all three categories.  It was<br \/>\nprovided :3.  The recruitment shall be made by Tamil Nadu  Uniformed  Services<br \/>\nRecruitment  Board  against  this  20%  reservation  in  each  year  of direct<br \/>\nrecruitment from among the Police Constables and  Head  Constables  and  their<br \/>\nequivalent  rank  in  Armed  Reserve  and  Tamil  Nadu  Special Police who are<br \/>\ngraduates and who have completed 5 years of service.   The  candidates  should<br \/>\nhave  a clean record without any punishments, other than the minor punishments<br \/>\nof blackmark, reprimand or censure, in the  5  years  preceding  the  date  of<br \/>\nnotification of selectio.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  The Tamil Nadu Uniformed  Services  Recruitment  Board  shall  follow  the<br \/>\nprescribed norms and procedures adopted in the direct recruitment selection of<br \/>\nSub-Inspectors  such  as  physical  measurements,  physical  efficiency  test,<br \/>\nwritten test, viva voce  etc.,  The  inter-se-  seniority  of  the  candidates<br \/>\nselected  against  this  recruitment would be above those selected in the open<br \/>\ncompetition in that year.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  For the year 1994-95, 270 vacancies were to be filled up under 2 0%  quota<br \/>\nmeant  for  departmental candidates and a selection was held on 17.11.1995 and<br \/>\n18.11.1995.  2191 candidates had participated in the said selection  including<br \/>\nthe  present  Respondent  No.1, out of which 1 668 candidates got qualified in<br \/>\nthe written test which was subsequently conducted on 20.11.1995.  Even  though<br \/>\nthe  present  Respondent  No.1  had secured more than 35% marks in the written<br \/>\ntest, he was not called up for viva-voce test  and  thereafter  the  selection<br \/>\nprocess continued in respect of top 625 candidates.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   The  present  Respondent  No.1  filed O.A.No.6443 of 1998, wherein it was<br \/>\ncontended that since prescription of minimum marks in the written test was not<br \/>\nmade known in advance, the candidates who have  participated  in  the  written<br \/>\ntest should  have  been  called  for  the interview by the respondents.  It is<br \/>\nfurther  indicated  that  several  vacancies  were  still  available  and  the<br \/>\napplicant should have been recruited against such vacant post<\/p>\n<p>5.   The  Tribunal primarily relying upon its earlier decision in O.A.Nos.7468<br \/>\nto 7479 of 1996 dated 30.12.1996, referred to Rule 3(d) of  Special  Rules  of<br \/>\nTamil  Nadu  Police  Subordinates Service and observed that such provision did<br \/>\nnot contemplate any stipulation that the candidate should  get  minimum  marks<br \/>\nbefore  he  is  allowed  to  participate  in  the  drill  test  and  viva-voce<br \/>\nexamination.  On the basis of the aforesaid observation, the Tribunal  gave  a<br \/>\ndirection for appointment of the present Respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   In  this  writ petition, the main contention of the petitioners is to the<br \/>\neffect that the Tribunal has erroneously applied the provisions  contained  in<br \/>\nRule 3(d) of the Special Rules of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinates Service Rules<br \/>\nwhich is applicable to the case of promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector from<br \/>\nthe post  of  Head  Constable.    It  is  contended that on the other hand the<br \/>\nprocedure relating to recruitment from among the  service  candidates  against<br \/>\n20%  quota,  as  envisaged in G.O.Ms.No.1054 dated 13.7.1995, being different,<br \/>\nthe order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.  We have already extracted paragraph 4  of  G.O.Ms.No.1054,  which  clearly<br \/>\nindicates  that  the  Tamil  Nadu  Uniformed  Services Recruitment Board shall<br \/>\nfollow the prescribed norms and procedures adopted in the  direct  recruitment<br \/>\nselection of Sub-Inspectors.  G.O.Ms.No.603 (P &amp; AR) dated 12.6.1985 lays down<br \/>\nthe procedure  for  such  direct  recruitment.  As per the aforesaid G.O., the<br \/>\nState Services constitute technical  and  non-technical  posts.    Tamil  Nadu<br \/>\nPolice Service  comes  under  Non-Technical  category.    Paragraph  6  of the<br \/>\naforesaid G.O., prescribes that when direct recruitment has to be made to  the<br \/>\nservices,  it  shall  be  made  on  the  basis  of  a  competitive examination<br \/>\ncomprising a written test and an oral test.  Under paragraph  7  it  has  been<br \/>\nprescribed that for the purpose of the examination, the services classified as<br \/>\nnon-technical  had  been grouped in different Groups and the Tamil Nadu Police<br \/>\nService comes under Group-I.  As per paragraph 8(a), in the case  of  services<br \/>\nincluded  in Group I, the competitive examination will comprise a written test<br \/>\nand an oral test of the  standard  mentioned  in  Annexure-I(b).    Annexure-I<br \/>\nrelates  to  Group  I  Services concerning Bachelor Degree Standard prescribes<br \/>\ndifferent subjects.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.  As per the notification dated 6.7.1998, certain amendments  were  made  to<br \/>\nthe Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service with retrospective<br \/>\neffect from  13.7.1995.    As  per  the proceedings of the Director General of<br \/>\nPolice and the Chairman of Tamil Nadu  Uniformed  Services  Recruitment  Board<br \/>\ndated  31.12.1993,  it  has  been indicated in paragraph 7 that the qualifying<br \/>\nmarks for the Written Test has been prescribed as 35%.  As per paragraph 9  of<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.603   dated  12.6  .1985  it  is  indicated  that  standard  of  the<br \/>\nexaminations for each group and the minimum number of marks to be obtained  at<br \/>\nthe written test to qualify for admission to the oral test shall be determined<br \/>\nby the  Commission  on  each  occasion.  It is obvious that in the proceedings<br \/>\ndated 31.12.1993 prescribing 35% as the  minimum  marks  is  pursuant  to  the<br \/>\naforesaid provision in G.O.Ms.No.603 dated 12.6.1985.  The aforesaid G.O., was<br \/>\nsubsequently amended  on 25.11.1993.  The existing paragraph 9 was re-numbered<br \/>\nas 9-(a) and the following paragraph was inserted :-\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.  In respect of Group-I services, the examination shall  comprise  of  two<br \/>\nsuccessive  stages,  (1)  Preliminary  Examination  (Objective  type)  for the<br \/>\nselection of  candidates  for  Main  examination;  and  (2)  Main  Examination<br \/>\n(Written  and  Interview) for selection of candidates for various services and<br \/>\nposts.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Preliminary Examination shall consist of two papers of Objective type  and<br \/>\nwould carry  a  maximum of 450 marks.  This examination is meant to serve as a<br \/>\nscreening test only and the marks obtained in the Preliminary  Examination  by<br \/>\nthe candidates  shall  not  be accounted for their final merit.  The number of<br \/>\ncandidates to be admitted to the main examination shall be  exactly  10  times<br \/>\nthe  total  number  of  vacancies  to  be  filled  in  the year in the various<br \/>\nservices, having regard to the rule of  reservation  of  appointments.    Only<br \/>\nthose  candidates  declared  by  the  Commission  to  have  qualified  in  the<br \/>\nPreliminary Examination in a year will be eligible for admission to  the  main<br \/>\nwritten examination of that year.  (Subject to other eligibilities).\n<\/p>\n<p>The  Main  examination  will consist of a written examination and an Interview<br \/>\ntest.  the written examination will consist  of  six  papers  of  conventional<br \/>\nessay type, each carrying 300 marks.\n<\/p>\n<p>If  the  total number of vacancies is five and above, the number of candidates<br \/>\nto be admitted to the Oral test shall be  exactly  two  times  the  number  of<br \/>\ncandidates  to  be  recruited  having  regard  to  the  rule of reservation of<br \/>\nappointments wherever it applies, based on the marks obtained at  the  written<br \/>\ntest.   when  the  total  number of vacancies is four and below the Commission<br \/>\nshall call candidates for interview, three times of the number of vacancies to<br \/>\nbe filled; subject to the rule of reservation  of  appointments,  wherever  it<br \/>\napplies.   The final selection shall be made with reference to the total marks<br \/>\nat the written test and the oral test taken together,  applying  the  rule  of<br \/>\nreservation of  appointments  wherever  it  applies.    Marks  obtained by the<br \/>\ncandidates in the main examination, both written  and  oral,  would  determine<br \/>\ntheir final  ranking.    Candidates  will  be allotted to the various services<br \/>\nkeeping in view of their ranks in the examination and preference expressed  by<br \/>\nthem for various services and posts. (Emphasis added)<\/p>\n<p>9.   In the aforesaid background relating to various orders\/rules, it has been<br \/>\nsubmitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since  total  number<br \/>\nof  vacancies  were  270,  the Selection Board shortlisted twice the number of<br \/>\ncandidates for the purpose of oral test and  all  those  candidates  who  have<br \/>\nsecured  marks equal to the marks secured by the 540th rank-holder were called<br \/>\nand that is how 625 candidates were called in  view  of  the  clear  direction<br \/>\ncontained  in  paragraph  9  of  the G.O., as amended and the Tribunal without<br \/>\nconsidering these aspects had erroneously applied Rule  3(d)  of  the  Special<br \/>\nRules of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.   The aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioners appears to be<br \/>\nsustainable and borne out  by  records.    The  procedure  contemplated  under<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.603  as  amended  on  25.11.1993  has  to be followed along with the<br \/>\nselection procedure laid down by the Selection Board.  In a given case, number<br \/>\nof candidates to be called would obviously depend upon  number  of  vacancies.<br \/>\nIf the vacancies are more than five, twice the number of candidates are called<br \/>\nto  the  interview,  subject  to,  of course to the minimum of the marks to be<br \/>\nsecured in the written examination.  In the present case, the respondent  No.1<br \/>\nhad  secured  the prescribed minimum marks in the written examination, but the<br \/>\nrank of the Respondent No.1 was far below 625.   Therefore,  there  was  every<br \/>\njustification in not calling him for the oral test.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.   The  Tribunal  has  relied upon Rule 3(d) and observed that there was no<br \/>\nminimum marks prescribed.  The Tribunal omitted to consider the most  relevant<br \/>\nfactor,  namely,  the  selection  was  not  by  promotion  from among the Head<br \/>\nConstables in which case Rule 3(d) would be applicable, but selection  was  on<br \/>\nthe  basis  of  G.O.Ms.No.1054  dated  13.7.1995 , which clearly indicated the<br \/>\nprocedure relating to direct recruitment should be followed.  Without  keeping<br \/>\nin  mind the aforesaid significant difference in the methods of selection, the<br \/>\nTribunal appears to have mechanically applied the principle enumerated in Rule<br \/>\n3(d) of the of the Special Rules of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service.<br \/>\nThe order passed by the Tribunal, therefore, cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.  Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 has  however  contended<br \/>\nthat  many  of  the posts in the reserved category are lying vacant and as per<br \/>\nthe policy decision of the Government, those posts should be filled up even by<br \/>\nrelaxing the method of recruitment.  For the aforesaid purpose, he has  placed<br \/>\nreliance  G.O.Ms.No.91  (Adi  Dravidar  and  Tribal  Welfare Department) dated<br \/>\n28.11.2001.  We have gone through the aforesaid  G.O.,  and  we  do  not  find<br \/>\nanything which strictly supports the case of the present Respondent No.1.  The<br \/>\naforesaid  G.O., has been issued in November, 2001 and obviously does not have<br \/>\nany applicability to the recruitment which was already  over.    There  is  no<br \/>\ndoubt that such G.O., would be applicable to the recruitment in future and the<br \/>\nrespondent  No.1  may  receive the benefit under such G.O., in future, if such<br \/>\ncontingency arises.  13.  Learned counsel for the  Respondent  No.1  has  also<br \/>\nplaced  reliance  upon  a  decision of the Tribunal in O.A.Nos.7468 to 7479 of<br \/>\n1996 as has been done by the Tribunal in  the  present  impugned  order.    As<br \/>\nalready  indicated,  the  Rule  3(d) of the Special Rules of Tamil Nadu Police<br \/>\nSubordinate Service relates to promotion to the post of  Sub-  Inspector  from<br \/>\nthe post  of  Head  Constable.    The  ratio of the said decision would not be<br \/>\napplicable at all to the case of selection by the process of written  test  as<br \/>\ncontemplated under G.O.Ms.No.1054 read with G.O.  Ms.No.603.  The Tribunal has<br \/>\nobviously  committed a mistake by placing reliance upon the decision which has<br \/>\nno application to the case of direct recruitment by the process  of  selection<br \/>\nfrom among the service candidates.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.   In  the result, the writ petition is allowed and the order passed by the<br \/>\nTribunal dated 11.7.2002 in O.A.NO.6443 of 1998 is quashed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet:  Yes<\/p>\n<p>dpk<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary,<br \/>\n    Ministry of Home,  Fort<br \/>\n    St.  George, Chennai 9.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Director General of Police,<br \/>\n    Chennai 4.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   The  Chairman,<br \/>\n     Tamilnadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,<br \/>\n     No.807, II Floor,<br \/>\n     Anna Salai, Chennai 2.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  A.  Elangovan,<br \/>\n    S\/o.  A.  Iyyasamy Gr.I.  PC 7518,<br \/>\n    Central  Crime  Branch,<br \/>\n    Egmore, Chennai 8.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.  The Registrar,<br \/>\n    Tamilnadu Administrative Tribunal,<br \/>\n    Chennai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20\/08\/2004 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA WRIT PETITION NO.3131 OF 2003 1. State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of [&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-50175","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>State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - 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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\"},\"wordCount\":2124,\"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\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\",\"name\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - 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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004","datePublished":"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004"},"wordCount":2124,"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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004","name":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-17T18:48:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-a-elangovan-on-20-august-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs A. Elangovan on 20 August, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50175","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=50175"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50175\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50175"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50175"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50175"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}