{"id":55995,"date":"2003-07-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-07-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003"},"modified":"2014-12-05T18:03:13","modified_gmt":"2014-12-05T12:33:13","slug":"e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","title":{"rendered":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 28\/07\/2003\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.P.SIVASUBRAMANIAM\n\nWrit Petition No.10392 of 1996\nand\nWMP.No.13753 of 1996\n                        \nE.V.Kumar              .....                       Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. The Union of India,\nrep. by the Ministry of Health and Family\nWelfare (Department of Health)\nNirman Bhavan, New Delhi\n\n2. The Union of India, rep. by therein\nLt. Governor, Pondicherry and\nrep. by the Chief Secretary to\nGovernment, Pondicherry\n\n3. The Secretary to Government\nLaw Department, Government of Pondicherry\nPondicherry\n\n4. The Director of Health and Family\nWelfare Services, Pondicherry.          .....             Respondents\n\nL.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T....J\n\nPrayer:  Petition filed under  Article  226  of  the  Constitution  of  India,\npraying to issue a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioner  :    Mr.R.Gandhi\n                Senior  Counsel\n                for  R.G.Narendhiran\n\nFor Respondents :  Mr.T.Murugesan Government Pleader (Pondicherry)\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>The petitioner, the former Additional District and Sessions Judge of Karaikal,<br \/>\nPondicherry has sought for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call  for  the<br \/>\nrecords  relating to the order of the second respondent in G.O.Rt.No.573\/95-LD<br \/>\ndated 13.12.1995, to quash the same and to direct the respondents to reimburse<br \/>\nto the petitioner, the actual amount of expenditure incurred by the petitioner<br \/>\nfor taking treatment of undergoing Coronary  by-pass  surgery  in  the  Apollo<br \/>\nHospitals,  Madras  as  certified  by the Chief Cardio Thoracic Surgeon of the<br \/>\nsaid hospital, after deducting the  medical  advance  granted  by  the  second<br \/>\nrespondent under G.O.Rt.No.288\/95-LD dated 05.06.1995.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   In  view  of  the  undisputed facts, it is not necessary to deal with the<br \/>\nfactual contentions raised by the  petitioner.    Admittedly,  the  petitioner<br \/>\nunderwent  coronary  by-pass  surgery  in  Apollo  Hospitals,  Madras  and the<br \/>\nHospital is also duly authorised by the Pondicherry Government as one  of  the<br \/>\nprivate  hospitals recognised for coronary by- pass surgery, namely Annexure-I<br \/>\nof the Office Memorandum dated 20.07.1994 .\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  It is also not disputed before me that the provision of  Central  services<br \/>\n(Medical  Attendance)  Rules  are  applicable  to  the  case of the petitioner<br \/>\nherein.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rule 6, of the Medical Attendance Rules is as follows:   &#8220;6.(1)  A  Government<br \/>\nservant shall be entitled, free of charge, to treatment &#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>(a) in such Government hospital at or near the place where he falls ill as can<br \/>\nin  the opinion of the authorised medical attendance provide the necessary and<br \/>\nsuitable treatment; or<\/p>\n<p>(b) if there is no such hospital as is referred to in sub-clause (a)  in  such<br \/>\nhospital  other  than a Government hospital at or near the place as can in the<br \/>\nopinion of  the  authorised  medical  attendant,  provide  the  necessary  and<br \/>\nsuitable treatment.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2)  Where a Government servant is entitled under sub-rule(1), free of charge,<br \/>\nto treatment in hospital, any amount paid by him on account of such  treatment<br \/>\nshall,  on  production  of  a certificate in writing by the authorised medical<br \/>\nattendant in this behalf, be reimbursed to  him  by  the  Central  Government:<br \/>\nProvided  that  the  controlling  officer  shall reject any claim if he is not<br \/>\nsatisfied with its genuineness on facts and circumstances of each case,  after<br \/>\ngiving an  opportunity  to  the  claimant of being heard in the matter.  While<br \/>\ndoing so, the controlling  officer  shall  communicate  to  the  claimant  the<br \/>\nreasons,  in  brief,  for  rejecting  the claim and the claimant may submit an<br \/>\nappeal to the Central Government within a period of  forty-five  days  of  the<br \/>\ndate of receipt of the order rejecting the claim.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  Perusal of the above mentioned Rule says that it is open to the Government<br \/>\nservant  who  is  entitled  to  be treated in a hospital other than Government<br \/>\nHospital, if such hospital as referred to in SubClause(a) is not available, he<br \/>\ncan get treatment in a hospital other than Government Hospital at or near  the<br \/>\nplace  as  can in the opinion of the authorised medical attendant, provide the<br \/>\nnecessary and suitable treatment.  Therefore, there is  no  dispute  over  the<br \/>\nfact  that  the  petitioner  was  entitled  to be treated at Apollo Hospitals,<br \/>\nMadras and there is no dispute over the said fact.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.  The dispute in the present case is that as  against  the  total  claim  of<br \/>\nRs.1,44,019\/-,  the  Government  has  sanctioned  a total sum of Rs.9 9,500\/-.<br \/>\nAccording to the  Government,  the  package  rate\/deal  arrangement  with  the<br \/>\nprivate  hospitals  and  the rate of coronary by- pass surgery for all private<br \/>\nhospitals in respect of private ward was Rs.89,000 \/-  and  Rs.10,500\/-  which<br \/>\nwas charged  for  Angiography test was reasonable.  It was also certified that<br \/>\nthe rate of Rs.89,000\/- charged by  the  Apollo  Hospitals,  Madras  was  also<br \/>\nreasonable.   Therefore, a total sum of Rs.99,500\/- was paid and reimbursed to<br \/>\nthe petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.  It is further stated that the Government of India already  recognised  the<br \/>\npackage  deal arrangement with the Private Hospitals and the rate for CAG\/CABG<br \/>\nand other investigations would be  regulated  on  package  deal  basis.    The<br \/>\npackage for coronary Angiography includes room rent from the date of admission<br \/>\nto  the  date  of discharge, services charges, nursing\/ medical care, Surgeons<br \/>\nand Anesthetists fee, operation theatre charges etc.,  but  does  not  include<br \/>\ndiet,  cosmetics, toiletary, telephone charges etc., which have to be borne by<br \/>\nthe beneficiaries themselves.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.  On a reading of Rule-6 as extracted above, there is no enabling  provision<br \/>\nfor the Government to fix any ceiling\/package deal.  The actual amount paid by<br \/>\nthe  patient  to  the  hospital  would  be repayable except for the categories<br \/>\nmentioned in the counter namely, diet, cosmetics, toiletary, telephone charges<br \/>\netc.,<\/p>\n<p>8.  A perusal of the bill submitted by the petitioner shows that  he  has  not<br \/>\nmade any  claim  towards any of the aforementioned prohibited items.  The bill<br \/>\nonly  deals  with  the  surgery,  room  rent,  professional  charges,  Doctors<br \/>\nconsultation charges, miscellaneous charges for the use of special dye(Maxima)<br \/>\nin  view  of  the  condition  of  the patient and the total amount is shown as<br \/>\nRs.1,44,019\/-.   Therefore,  the  bill  does  not  include  items  which   are<br \/>\ndisapproved by  the respondents.  As stated earlier, there is no limitation or<br \/>\nceiling in the Rules.  It is not possible for the Central Government to  issue<br \/>\nan Office Memorandum overriding the rule which is statutory in character.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.   With the result, I am inclined to hold that the petitioner is entitled to<br \/>\nthe full amount as claimed by him, namely Rs.1,44,019\/-.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  The above mentioned conclusion of mine  also  receives  approval  by  the<br \/>\nSupreme Court  in  S.Jagannath  Vs.    Union  of  India and Others reported in<br \/>\n((1997) 2 SCC 87), wherein the Supreme Court has held that &#8221; if the Government<br \/>\nServant has suffered an ailment which  requires  treatment  at  a  specialised<br \/>\napproved  hospital  and  on  reference  whereat  the  government  servant  had<br \/>\nundergone such treatment therein, it is but the duty of the State to bear  the<br \/>\nexpenditure incurred by the Government servant.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>11.   The  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for the petitioner also claims<br \/>\ninterest on the amount of balance to be paid to the petitioner, on the  ground<br \/>\nthat the petitioner has paid the amount due to the hospital on his discharge.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.    The   learned   counsel   also   relies   on   a  Judgment  of  Justice<br \/>\nBakthavatsalam,J., in Ramayee  V.    Vs.    The  Commissioner  of   Pudukottai<br \/>\nMunicipality  reported  in (1882 WLR 330), where the learned Judge had ordered<br \/>\n18% interest.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.  Further reference is also made to the judgment of the  Supreme  Court  in<br \/>\nHema  Devi  and  Another  Vs.State  of  Bihar  and others reported in (2002(6)<br \/>\nSupreme 417).\n<\/p>\n<p>14.  Considering the overall circumstances, I am inclined to  order  that  the<br \/>\nrespondents  shall pay the balance amount with interest at the rate of 12% per<br \/>\nannum from the date when payment became due.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.  The writ petition is ordered accordingly.  Consequently, WMP.No.13753  of<br \/>\n1996 is closed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:Yes<br \/>\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n<p>ksr<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  The  Union  of  India,  rep.  by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare<br \/>\n(Department of Health) Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Union of India, rep.  by therein Lt.  Governor, Pondicherry  and  rep.<br \/>\nby the Chief Secretary to Government, Pondicherry<\/p>\n<p>3.   The  Secretary  to  Government  Law Department, Government of Pondicherry<br \/>\nPondicherry<\/p>\n<p>4.  The Director of Health and Family Welfare Services, Pondicherry.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28\/07\/2003 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.P.SIVASUBRAMANIAM Writ Petition No.10392 of 1996 and WMP.No.13753 of 1996 E.V.Kumar &#8230;.. Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Union of India, rep. by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare [&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-55995","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 v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - 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\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1198,\"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\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\",\"name\":\"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - 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\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003","datePublished":"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003"},"wordCount":1198,"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\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003","name":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-05T12:33:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/e-v-kumar-vs-the-union-of-india-on-28-july-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"E.V.Kumar vs The Union Of India on 28 July, 2003"}]},{"@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\/55995","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=55995"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55995\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55995"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55995"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55995"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}