{"id":61623,"date":"2008-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-12-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008"},"modified":"2018-08-12T10:50:26","modified_gmt":"2018-08-12T05:20:26","slug":"p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","title":{"rendered":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C) No. 19206 of 2007(J)\n\n\n1. P.MOHANAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. C.MOHANAN,\n3. A.SIVAKRISHNAN,\n4. A.V.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR,\n5. M.BALAKRISHNAN,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E),\n\n3. DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI\n\n Dated :01\/01\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                          V.GIRI, J\n                        -------------------\n     W.P.(C)s. 19206\/2007, 31781\/2007, 26324\/2007,\n   35685\/2007, 31391\/2007, 28203\/2007 & 20196\/2007\n                        --------------------\n         Dated this the 1st day of January, 2008\n\n                        JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Common issues arise for consideration in all these<\/p>\n
cases. Therefore, they have been considered together and<\/p>\n
are disposed of by a common judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2.    Petitioners in all these cases were appointed as 2nd<\/p>\n
Grade Surveyor during the period 1972-73. They were<\/p>\n
then fitted in the scale of 90-190. Apparently at that point<\/p>\n
of time, certain other 2nd Grade Surveyors         in the same<\/p>\n
department, who had passed the              higher Survey test,<\/p>\n
were appointed in the scale of pay of Rs.100-210\/-. Since<\/p>\n
the nature of the duties being discharged by the<\/p>\n
petitioners and similarly situated persons who do not pass<\/p>\n
higher Survey test were the same of those who passed<\/p>\n
the same, several writ petitions were filed before this<\/p>\n
Court claiming the same scale of pay.               By several<\/p>\n
judgments, including Exts.P1 and P2, this Court found<\/p>\n
that the petitioners and similarly situated persons were<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                             2<\/span><\/p>\n
entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 100-210\/-<\/p>\n
3.    Ext.P2     judgment       was  accepted  and   Ext.P3<\/p>\n
Government Order was issued on 13.1.2000 declaring<\/p>\n
that the scale of pay of 2nd Grade Surveyors will be<\/p>\n
revised to 100-210        from 19-190     with retrospective<\/p>\n
effect. Consequently directions were also issued. Since<\/p>\n
by the time Ext.P3 was issued several pay revisions had<\/p>\n
taken place,      the Accountant General     requested the<\/p>\n
Government       for a general Government Order in the<\/p>\n
matter of accepting re-options from the petitioners and<\/p>\n
similarly situated persons, relatable to the pay revisions<\/p>\n
which had been effected subsequent              to    1973.<\/p>\n
Notwithstanding Ext.P3, by Ext.P7 communication dated<\/p>\n
16.3.2001, Government           intimated the  Director   of<\/p>\n
Survey that no re-option may be permitted by those 2nd<\/p>\n
Grade Surveyors whose scale of pay was revised from<\/p>\n
19-190 to 100-210 on the basis of Ext.P3 Government<\/p>\n
Order dated 13.1.2000.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4.    Ext.P7 was challenged in a batch of writ petitions<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
before this Court and the same was quashed. Appeal by<\/p>\n
the State was also dismissed by Ext.P8 judgment and<\/p>\n
affirmed by the Supreme Court as evidenced by Ext.P9.<\/p>\n
The result of the same was that the petitioners and<\/p>\n
similarly situated persons were given the facility of re-<\/p>\n
option in relation to the pay revisions which took place<\/p>\n
subsequent to 1973. Consequent upon the revision of<\/p>\n
pay from 90-190, applications were submitted for such<\/p>\n
re-options also. The said options were directed to be<\/p>\n
accepted under Ext.P11 series judgments.         But by<\/p>\n
Ext.P13 order, Government issued a communication to<\/p>\n
the Director        stating that the benefit of re-option<\/p>\n
consequent      on the directions of this Court, shall be<\/p>\n
granted only subject to the following conditions.<\/p>\n
(i).  The benefit of re-option will be limited to the<\/p>\n
pensionary benefits only.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
(ii). Neither excess amount drawn consequent on re-<\/p>\n
option will be refunded nor arrears will be paid.<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            4<\/span><\/p>\n
(iii). Re-option will be exercised within two months from<\/p>\n
the date of order permitting the exercise of re-option.<\/p>\n
5.     In the case of some of the 2nd Grade Surveyors who<\/p>\n
were already         beneficiaries of the   directions for<\/p>\n
acceptance of the re-option, proceedings under the<\/p>\n
Contempt of Courts Act was moved and thereupon the<\/p>\n
Government issued a direction to the Director to<\/p>\n
disburse the arrears of pay to the said petitioners but<\/p>\n
subject to the outcome of SLP No.2662\/2006            and<\/p>\n
connected cases pending before the Supreme Court<\/p>\n
relating to the payment of arrears consequent upon re-<\/p>\n
option. By Ext.P15 communication dated 16.12.2006, it<\/p>\n
was intimated that the date of re-option to be permitted<\/p>\n
to the petitioners and similarly situated persons pursuant<\/p>\n
to the directions of this Court with regard to the time<\/p>\n
bound higher Grade, shall not be extended beyond the<\/p>\n
date of effect of       the subsequent pay revision order.<\/p>\n
Apparently the petitioners’ re-options were not accepted<\/p>\n
by the Director as evidenced by Ext.P16 series<\/p>\n
essentially on the basis of Exts.P13 and P15 orders. It is<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            5<\/span><\/p>\n
in these circumstances that the            petitioners have<\/p>\n
approached this Court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.    Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the<\/p>\n
first respondent       in Writ Petition No.19206\/2007 and<\/p>\n
adopted in other cases also.           They have justified<\/p>\n
Exts.P13, P15, P17 and P18.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.    I heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. I<\/p>\n
Sheela Devi        and the learned Special Government<\/p>\n
Pleader, Sri. Manoj Kumar.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
8.    In my view, the short issue that arises for<\/p>\n
consideration is whether the        conditions contained in<\/p>\n
Ext.P13 as regards the manner in which the re-option<\/p>\n
exercised by the petitioners and similarly situated<\/p>\n
persons, and the conditions contained in Ext.P15 as<\/p>\n
regards time bound Higher Grade promotion are<\/p>\n
sustainable or not. In so far as Ext.P13 is concerned, I<\/p>\n
am of the view that the conditions imposed cannot be<\/p>\n
enforced against the petitioners for the simple reason<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            6<\/span><\/p>\n
that this Court in Ext.P2(and reportedly in other similar<\/p>\n
judgments)       specifically held that the scale of pay<\/p>\n
applicable to 2nd      Grade Surveyors appointed in 1973<\/p>\n
shall be revised to 100-210. In Ext.P2 judgment, there is<\/p>\n
a specific direction to pay the arrears of wages also.<\/p>\n
Consequently, there cannot be an interdiction against<\/p>\n
the benefit of the re-option being reflected in the actual<\/p>\n
wages due to the petitioners nor is there any justification<\/p>\n
confining the benefit of the re-option. After all it is found<\/p>\n
that the scale of pay made available to some of the 2nd<\/p>\n
Grade Surveyors was illegal. There is no justification for<\/p>\n
denying the petitioners and similarly situated persons,<\/p>\n
the actual benefit of the scale of pay by way of arrears of<\/p>\n
wages also. Condition No.1 in Ext.P3 is therefore bad in<\/p>\n
law. In so far as condition No.2 is concerned, it is<\/p>\n
difficult to postulate drawal of excess amounts in the<\/p>\n
context     of   exercise of re-option by anyone of the<\/p>\n
petitioners and therefore, it would actually operate only<\/p>\n
against the petitioners who would be entitled to arrears,<\/p>\n
in certain cases,        on re-option being exercised and<\/p>\n
accepted. For the same reason as has been mentioned<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            7<\/span><\/p>\n
above, and taking note of the directions contained in<\/p>\n
Ext.P2 judgment, I am of the view that arrears are to be<\/p>\n
paid consequent upon the acceptance of re-option.        In<\/p>\n
so far as condition No.3 is concerned, it is to be verified<\/p>\n
whether it will have a real impact in as much as in<\/p>\n
almost all the cases this Court had permitted the persons<\/p>\n
who had approached this Court to exercise re-option. In<\/p>\n
the light of the fact that this Court had interfered with<\/p>\n
Ext.P7 and the judgment of the learned Single Judge was<\/p>\n
upheld by the Division Bench, there seems to be no<\/p>\n
justification for excluding a category of 2nd       Grade<\/p>\n
Surveyors from the benefit of the re-option, by referring<\/p>\n
to the time limit for exercising re-option as such. In my<\/p>\n
view, condition No.3 in Ext.P13 also need not           be<\/p>\n
enforced.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
9.    I should hasten to make it clear that the<\/p>\n
communication contained in Ext.P14 does not seem to,<\/p>\n
in any manner, warrant any interference.          Learned<\/p>\n
Special Government Pleader submits that the special<\/p>\n
Leave Petition referred in Ext.P14 is one involving an<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            8<\/span><\/p>\n
issue as to whether the benefit of re-option will have to<\/p>\n
be granted with reference to the date of re-option or the<\/p>\n
submission of the application for re-option as such. In<\/p>\n
my view, if the judgment of the Supreme Court in the<\/p>\n
Special Petition referred to in Ext.P14 is of general<\/p>\n
application that is intended to apply to all cases where<\/p>\n
re-option is exercised consequent upon the revision of<\/p>\n
the scale of pay,         it may not be possible for the<\/p>\n
petitioners to say that they shall be left unaffected by<\/p>\n
this.    Question as to whether the judgment of the<\/p>\n
Supreme Court will have any impact on the petitioners<\/p>\n
need not be considered at this stage. Suffice it to say<\/p>\n
that if the final decision of the Supreme Court in the<\/p>\n
aforementioned Special Leave Petition referred to in<\/p>\n
Ext.P14 affects the petitioners also, then obviously it is<\/p>\n
open to the Government to take action after issuing<\/p>\n
notice.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
10. Petitioners also challenged Exts.P15, P17 and P18.<\/p>\n
In so far as the conditions in Ext.P15 are concerned, I am<\/p>\n
of the view that no interference is warranted. In so far<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            9<\/span><\/p>\n
as time bound higher grades are concerned, I do not<\/p>\n
think there is anything illegal in the stipulation that the<\/p>\n
date of re-option should not extend beyond the date of<\/p>\n
the specific pay revision. As a matter of fact, I do not<\/p>\n
think that the petitioners will be aggrieved by Ext.P15. I<\/p>\n
do not therefore find any grounds to interfere with<\/p>\n
Ext.P15.     In so far as Exts.P17 and P18 are concerned,<\/p>\n
suffice it to say, that enforcement of the same shall be<\/p>\n
subject to the findings which are already made as<\/p>\n
regards the conditions in Ext.P13 and the enforceability<\/p>\n
of the same as such.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
11. In the result writ petitions are disposed of in the<\/p>\n
following terms.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     (i).   Petitioners shall be entitled to  the   actual<\/p>\n
     benefit of the revision of scale of pay from 90-190<\/p>\n
     to 100-210 in the light of the directions given in<\/p>\n
     Ext.P2 and similar judgments.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     (ii). Conditions contained in Ext.P13 shall not be<\/p>\n
     enforced against the petitioners in the matter of<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            10<\/span><\/p>\n
     considering their re-options which they would have<\/p>\n
     submitted consequent upon Ext.P3.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     (iii). Re-option      submitted  by   the  petitioners<\/p>\n
     pursuant to Ext.P3 shall be re-considered in the<\/p>\n
     light     of    the    findings  herein  issued   and<\/p>\n
     consequential benefit shall be granted within a<\/p>\n
     period of three months from the date of receipt of a<\/p>\n
     copy of this judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     (iv). The declaration as regards Exts.P14 and P15<\/p>\n
     shall govern the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      (v). Exts.P17 and P18 circulars shall be enforced<\/p>\n
      only subject to the directions issued above as<\/p>\n
      regards Ext.P13.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            There will be no orders as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                    V.GIRI,
\n                                    Judge<\/p>\n
mrcs<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).19206\/2007 and Connected
\nCases                            11<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 19206 of 2007(J) 1. P.MOHANAN, … Petitioner 2. C.MOHANAN, 3. A.SIVAKRISHNAN, 4. A.V.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, 5. M.BALAKRISHNAN, Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY … Respondent 2. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A & E), 3. DIRECTOR […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-61623","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nP.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - 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\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\" \/>\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=\"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-12T05:20:26+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-12T05:20:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1688,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\",\"name\":\"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-12T05:20:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - 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\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-12T05:20:26+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008","datePublished":"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-12T05:20:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008"},"wordCount":1688,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008","name":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-12T05:20:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-mohanan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-1-january-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 1 January, 2008"}]},{"@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\/61623","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=61623"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61623\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61623"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61623"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61623"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}