{"id":65869,"date":"2008-02-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008"},"modified":"2018-11-22T10:44:08","modified_gmt":"2018-11-22T05:14:08","slug":"vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 08\/02\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU\n\nWrit Petition No.5485 of 2005\n\n1.  Vellaisamy Durairaj\n\n 2.  R.J.Rabindran\n\n 3.  M. Venkataraman\n\n 4.  P. Athimoolam\n\n 5.  T. Veerapandi\n\n 6.  S. Raghupathy\n\n 7.  Chinnadurai\n\n 8.  R. Thirumalai\n\n 9.  C. Muthusamy\n\n10.  S. Esakkiappan\n\n11.  R. Pandy\t\t\t...\t\tPetitioners\n\n\nVs\n\n\n1.  Union of India\n    rep. by its Secretary\n    Ministry of Labour\n    Shram Mantralaya\n    New Delhi.\n\n\n\n2.  Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension)\n    Employee's Provident Fund Organisation\n    Head Office\n    Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan\n    New Delhi 110 066.\n\n3.  Regional Provident Fund Commissioner\n      (Pension)\n    20 Royapettah High Road\n    Chennai 600 014.\n\n4.  Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner\n      (Pension)\n    No.10-A\/3 St. Thomas Road\n    High Ground\n    Tirunelveli 627 011.\t...\t\tRespondents.\n\n\n\t\tPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the\nrecords of the first respondent in letter No.R-15025\/01\/99\/SS II dated 10\/5\/1999\nof the first respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the\nrespondents to pay the petitioners the pensionary benefits to which they are\nentitled to under the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 and direct the respondents\nto pay the arrears of pension from the date of commencement of pension with\ninterest and damages within a stipulated time.\n\n\n!For petitioner \t...\tMr.CR.Shanmuganathan\n\n^For respondents\t...\tMr.M.K.Ramakrishnan\n\t\t\t\t\tfor R.1\n\n\t\t\t\tMr.A.Saravanan\n\t\t\t\tfor E.P.F\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tThe petitioners were employed in different Organisations and they<br \/>\nwere members of Family Pension Scheme under the Employees Provident Fund and<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.  They have been put to more than 20 years of<br \/>\npast service.  During their service, the petitioners were regularly contributing<br \/>\nto the Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 until the Employees Pension Scheme,<br \/>\n1995 came into force on 16\/11\/1995.  After the advent of the Employees Pension<br \/>\nScheme of 1995, the petitioners were regularly contributing to the Scheme till<br \/>\ntheir date of retirement.  On retirement, the petitioners are eligible for<br \/>\npension as well as Past Service Pension Benefit under Clause 12 of the Employees<br \/>\nPension Scheme of 1995.  The relevant sub-clause 1 (5) of 12 of the said Act is<br \/>\nas follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t&#8220;1.  A member shall be entitled to:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(a).  superannuation pension if he has rendered eligible service of<br \/>\n20 years of more and retires on attaining the age of 58 years;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(b).  retirement pension, if he has rendered eligible service of 20<br \/>\nyears or more and retires or otherwise ceases to be in the employment before<br \/>\nattaining the age of 58 years;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(c).  short service pension, if he has rendered eligible service of<br \/>\n10 years or more but less than 20 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(2).  In the case of a new entrant the amount of monthly<br \/>\nsuperannuation pension or retiring pension, as the case may be, shall be<br \/>\ncomputed in accordance with the following factors namely:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMonthly member&#8217;s pension<br \/>\n = pensionable salary x Pensionable service<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t    70<\/span><\/p>\n<p>\t\t(3).  In the case of an employee (who was a amember of the ceased<br \/>\nFamily Pension Scheme, 1971 and who hasn ot attained the age of 48 years on the<br \/>\n16th November, 1995:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tSuperannuation\/retirement\/short service pension shall be equal to<br \/>\nthe aggregate of<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(a)  Pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period of<br \/>\npensionable service rendered from the 16th November, 1995 or Rs.635\/- per month<br \/>\nwhichever is more;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(b).  Past service pension benefit shall be as given below:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe past service benefit payable on completion of 58 years of age on<br \/>\n16\/11\/1995.\n<\/p>\n<p>Years of past service<br \/>\nSalary upto<br \/>\nRs.2,500\/- p.m.<br \/>\nSalary more than<br \/>\nRs.2,500\/- p.m.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">(1)<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">(2)<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">(3)<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)<br \/>\n        Upto   11 years<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">80<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">85<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)<br \/>\nMore than 11 years<br \/>\n  but  upto 15 years<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">95<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">105<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)<br \/>\n   M than More than 15 years  but<br \/>\nless than 20 years<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">120<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">135<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)<br \/>\n          Beyond 20 years<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">150<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">170<\/span><\/p>\n<p>subject to a minimum of Rs.800\/- per month provided the past service is 24<br \/>\nyears.  If the aggregate service of the member is less than 24 years, the<br \/>\npension and the benefits computed as above shall be reduced proportionately<br \/>\nsubject to a minim of Rs.450\/- per month.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(c).  On completion of the age of 58 years after 16\/11\/1995, the<br \/>\nbenefit under column (2) or column (3) above, as the case may be shall be<br \/>\nmultiplied by the factor given in Table &#8216;B&#8217; corresponding to the period between<br \/>\n16\/11\/1995 and date of attainment of age 58 to arrive at past service pension<br \/>\npayable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(4).  In the case of an employee [who was a member of the ceased<br \/>\nFamily Pension Scheme, 1971] and has attained the age of 48 years but less than<br \/>\n53 years on the 16th November, 1995, the superannuation\/retirement pension shall<br \/>\nbe equal to the aggregate of:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(a).  pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period<br \/>\nof service rendered from the 16th November, 1995 or Rs.438\/- per month whichever<br \/>\nis more;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(b).  past service benefit as provided in sub-paragraph (3) subject<br \/>\nto a minimum of Rs.600\/- per month provided the past service is 24 years.<br \/>\nProvided further that if it is less than 24 years the pension payable and the<br \/>\npast service benefits taken together shall be proportionately less subject to<br \/>\nthe minimum of Rs.325\/- per  month.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(5).  In the case of an employee [who was a member of the ceased<br \/>\nFamily Pension Scheme, 1971] and who has attained the age of 53 years or more on<br \/>\nthe 16th November, 1995, the superannuation\/retirement pension shall be equal to<br \/>\nthe aggregate of:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t(a).  pension as determined under sub-paragraph (2) for the period<br \/>\nof service rendered from the 16th November,  1995 per month or Rs.335\/- per<br \/>\nmonth whichever is more.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(b).  past service benefits provided in sub-paragraph (3) subject to the<br \/>\nminimum of Rs.500\/- per month, provided the past service is 24 years.  Provided<br \/>\nfurther that if it is less than 24 years the pension payable and the past<br \/>\nservice benefits shall be proportionately lesser but subject to the minimum of<br \/>\nRs.265\/- per month.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t2.  The petitioners 1 to 9 had attained 48 years of age as on 16th<br \/>\nNovember, 1995 which is the date of coming into force of the Scheme.  The<br \/>\npetitioners 10 and 11 had attained the age of 53 years as on the said date.  So,<br \/>\nas per the above Scheme, the petitioners 1 to 9 are eligible for pension   as<br \/>\nper clause 12 (4) of the Employees&#8217; Pension Scheme, 1995 and  the petitioners 10<br \/>\nand 11 are eligible for pension under clause 12 (5) of the Employees&#8217; Pension<br \/>\nScheme, 1995. Accordingly, they have been paid pension.  But while applying the<br \/>\nformula for the past  service benefits as contemplated under clause 12 (4) (b)<br \/>\nand 12 (5) (b), they have not been provided with the minimum amount as<br \/>\nprescribed therein.   According to them, the respondents have applied the<br \/>\nformula contained in para 12 (3) (b) of the Scheme and they are paying less<br \/>\namount of pension than the amount to which they are entitled for.  When the<br \/>\npetitioners made representations, they were told that the first respondent in a<br \/>\nletter of clarification in letter No.R.15025\/01\/99\/SS-II dated 10\/5\/1999 has<br \/>\nstated  that the pensioners would be entitled for a minimum of Rs.500\/-  and<br \/>\nRs.600\/-  as the case may be.  Based on the said clarification only, the<br \/>\npetitiners are not paid the amount which they claimed.  The petitioners<br \/>\ntherefore, challenge the said letter of clarification of the first respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t3.  Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the<br \/>\nlearned counsel appearing for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t4.  In the case of all the petitioners, there is no dispute that<br \/>\nthey have completed  more than 24 years of past service and under clause 12 (4)\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) of the Pension Scheme of 1995, the Past Service Pension shall be subject to<br \/>\nthe minimum of Rs.600\/- p.m., and the past service benefit payable for the other<br \/>\npetitioners under 12 (5) (b) is subject to the minimum of Rs.500\/- p.m.<\/p>\n<p>\t\t5.  A close reading of the provisions extracted above would go to<br \/>\nshow that the pension to be payable shall be the aggregate of pension as<br \/>\ndetermined under paragraph 2 for the period of pensionable service rendered from<br \/>\n16th November 1995 or Rs.635\/- which ever is more and past service pension<br \/>\nbenefit shall be  subject to a minimum of Rs.800\/- p.m.  Clause a and b of sub-<br \/>\nclause 3,  sub-clause 4 and sub-clause 5 are separate.  The minimum of Rs.800\/-<br \/>\nas found in sub-clause (b) 2 to clause 3, Rs.600\/-  as found in clause (2) (b)<br \/>\nto sub-clause 4 and minimum of Rs.500\/- as found in sub-clause (b) to clause 5<br \/>\nare all independent to the minimum of amount provided in sub-clause (a) to<br \/>\nclause 3 sub-clause (a) to clause 4 and sub-clause 1 to clause 5.  In the<br \/>\nimpugned clarification, the first respondent has applied the ceiling of Rs.800\/-<br \/>\n, Rs.600\/- and Rs.500\/- which are under sub-clause (b) to the respective clause<br \/>\nwrongly to sub-clause (a) to clause 3, 4 and 5.  Thus, the impugned<br \/>\nclarification is not at all correct and the same  deserves to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t6.  To make it clear I would say that under sub-clause a to clause<br \/>\n3, there has to be a minimum amount of Rs.630\/- to be paid and under sub-clause\n<\/p>\n<p>(b),  the minimum amount to be paid is Rs.800\/-.  Thus, the aggregate minimum<br \/>\namount is Rs.1,435\/-.  Similarly, under clause 4, the minimum amount to be paid<br \/>\nis Rs.438\/- and Rs.600\/- totally Rs.1,038\/- and similarly, under clause 5, the<br \/>\nminimum amount to be paid is Rs.335  and Rs.500 totalling to Rs.835\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t7.  In view of the above, the impugned clarification letter of the<br \/>\nfirst respondent is set aside and the writ petition is allowed and  the<br \/>\nrespondents are directed to pay pension under the Employees&#8217; Pension Scheme,<br \/>\n1995 and also to pay the arrears in the manner indicated above. No costs.<br \/>\nConsequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition No.5973 of 2005 is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>mvs.\n<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  Union of India<br \/>\n    rep. by its Secretary<br \/>\n    Ministry of Labour<br \/>\n    Shram Mantralaya<br \/>\n    New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension)<br \/>\n    Employee&#8217;s Provident Fund Organisation<br \/>\n    Head Office<br \/>\n    Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan<br \/>\n    New Delhi 110 066.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  Regional Provident Fund Commissioner<br \/>\n      (Pension)<br \/>\n    20 Royapettah High Road<br \/>\n    Chennai 600 014.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner<br \/>\n      (Pension)<br \/>\n    No.10-A\/3 St. Thomas Road<br \/>\n    High Ground<br \/>\n    Tirunelveli 627 011.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08\/02\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU Writ Petition No.5485 of 2005 1. Vellaisamy Durairaj 2. R.J.Rabindran 3. M. Venkataraman 4. P. Athimoolam 5. T. Veerapandi 6. S. Raghupathy 7. Chinnadurai 8. R. Thirumalai [&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-65869","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>Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - 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\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1390,\"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\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\",\"name\":\"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 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":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - 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\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008"},"wordCount":1390,"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\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008","name":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-22T05:14:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaisamy-durairaj-vs-union-of-india-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vellaisamy Durairaj vs Union Of India on 8 February, 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\/65869","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=65869"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65869\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65869"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65869"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65869"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}