{"id":68339,"date":"2007-03-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-03-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007"},"modified":"2017-09-29T23:02:47","modified_gmt":"2017-09-29T17:32:47","slug":"r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","title":{"rendered":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C) No. 8866 of 2007(E)\n\n\n1. R.RAJA GOPALAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SUDHEER\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN\n\n Dated :28\/03\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                        K.K. DENESAN, J.\n\n\n\n                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n\n                 W.P.(C) No. 8866 OF 2007 E\n\n                = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n\n\n\n               Dated this the 28th March, 2007\n\n\n\n                        J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>     The   petitioner   retired   from   the   service   of   the<\/p>\n<p>respondent-Board,   on   31-3-2004,   while   working   as<\/p>\n<p>Assistant   Secretary.         The   grievance   sought   to   be<\/p>\n<p>redressed   through   this   writ   petition   pertains   to   the<\/p>\n<p>non-payment   of   commuted   value   of   pension   due   to   him.\n<\/p>\n<p>The respondent has not accorded sanction for payment of<\/p>\n<p>commuted   value   of   pension.            According   to   the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner,   he   is   entitled   to   commute   his   pension   in<\/p>\n<p>accordance   with  the  rules  and  upon  such  commutation  he<\/p>\n<p>is   entitled   to   receive   the   amount   thus   sanctioned,<\/p>\n<p>immediately on his retirement.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2.   The   respondent   has   filed   a   counter   affidavit.\n<\/p>\n<p>The   respondent  states  that  but  for  a  vigilance  enquiry<\/p>\n<p>pending   against   the   petitioner,   the     entire   terminal<\/p>\n<p>benefits including commuted value of pension would have<\/p>\n<p>been   paid   to   him,   by   this   time.          Ext.   R1(b)<\/p>\n<p>communication   received   from   the   Vigilance   and   Anti-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WPC No.8866 \/2007                -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>corruption   Bureau,   Thiruvananthapuram   addressed   to   the<\/p>\n<p>Secretary   of   the   respondent   shows   that   &#8220;no   vigilance<\/p>\n<p>case is pending against the petitioner&#8221;.  What is going<\/p>\n<p>on   is   a   vigilance   enquiry.     Ext.   R1(b)   further   says<\/p>\n<p>that   that   enquiry   may   or   may   not   result   in   the<\/p>\n<p>registration   of   a   case.     As   matters   now   stand,   the<\/p>\n<p>vigilance is not in a position to express any definite<\/p>\n<p>opinion   as   to   what   would   be   the   outcome   of   the<\/p>\n<p>vigilance enquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>     3.   Counsel   for   the   petitioner   submits   that<\/p>\n<p>pendency   of  the  vigilance  enquiry  will  not  come  within<\/p>\n<p>the   purview   of   the   expression   &#8216;judicial   proceeding&#8217;   in<\/p>\n<p>Rule   3A(a)   of   Part   III   of   Kerala   Service   Rules,   and<\/p>\n<p>therefore,   the   respondent   is   acting   illegally   by   its<\/p>\n<p>refusal   to   sanction   the   commuted   value   of   pension,<\/p>\n<p>thereby   depriving   the   petitioner   of   a   substantial<\/p>\n<p>amount   he   is   entitled   to,   towards   terminal   benefits.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rule 3A(a) aforesaid reads:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>            &#8220;Rule   3-A.(a)   Where   any   departmental   or<\/p>\n<p>      judicial   proceeding   is   instituted   under   Rule<\/p>\n<p>      3   or   where   a   departmental   proceeding   is<\/p>\n<p>      continued   under   clause   (a)   of   the   proviso<\/p>\n<p>      thereto,   against   an   employee   who   has   retired<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WPC No.8866 \/2007                               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>           on attaining the age of compulsory retirement<\/p>\n<p>           or   otherwise,   he   shall   be   paid   during   the<\/p>\n<p>           period   commencing   from   the   date   of   his<\/p>\n<p>           retirement   to   the   date   on   which,   upon<\/p>\n<p>           conclusion   of   such   proceeding   final   orders<\/p>\n<p>           are   passed,   a   provisional   pension   not<\/p>\n<p>           exceeding   the   maximum   pension   which   would<\/p>\n<p>           have   been   admissible   on   the   basis   of   his<\/p>\n<p>           qualifying           service          upto         the         date         of<\/p>\n<p>           retirement   or   if   he   was   under   suspension   on<\/p>\n<p>           the   date   of   retirement,   upto   the   date<\/p>\n<p>           immediately   preceding   the   date   on   which   he<\/p>\n<p>           was   placed   under   suspension,   but   no   gratuity<\/p>\n<p>           or   death-cum-retirement   gratuity   shall   be<\/p>\n<p>           paid   to   him   until   the   conclusion   of   such<\/p>\n<p>           proceeding   and   the   issue   of   final   orders<\/p>\n<p>           thereon.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>           4.   Counsel   for   the   respondent   submits   that   the<\/p>\n<p>amount   is   withheld   in   the   light   of   the   communication<\/p>\n<p>received   from   the   Vigilance   and   Anti-Corruption   Bureau<\/p>\n<p>to          the         effect         that            enquiry            into         alleged<\/p>\n<p>misappropriation of funds is going on.\n<\/p>\n<p>           5. Heard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>           6.   The   only   question   for   consideration   is   whether<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner who retired from service on 31-3-2004 is<\/p>\n<p>entitled   to   get   commuted   value   of   pension   and   whether<\/p>\n<p>there   is   legal   sanction   for   withholding   that   amount.\n<\/p>\n<p>It   is   not   disputed   that   the   service   rendered   by   the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WPC No.8866 \/2007                -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>petitioner   is   pensionable,   and   further,   that   he   is<\/p>\n<p>entitled to commute a portion of the pension sanctioned<\/p>\n<p>to   him.   However,   the   respondent-Board   would   argue   that<\/p>\n<p>it   is   justified   in   withholding   payment   of   the   same,<\/p>\n<p>pending vigilance enquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>     7.     Now   3   years   have   elapsed   since   the   retirement<\/p>\n<p>of   the   petitioner.        Rule   3   of   Part   III,   K.S.Rs.\n<\/p>\n<p>empowers   the   respondent   to   withhold   D.C.R.G.   pending<\/p>\n<p>enquiry   into   allegations   involving   any   pecuniary   loss<\/p>\n<p>sustained   by   the   Board   by   the   negligence   or   other<\/p>\n<p>culpable   action   or   omission   on   the   part   of   its<\/p>\n<p>employees   or   pensioners.       Even   in   such     cases   the<\/p>\n<p>liability shall be fixed after notice to them within a<\/p>\n<p>maximum period of   3 years from the date of retirement<\/p>\n<p>of   the   employee.     The   respondent   has   no   case   that<\/p>\n<p>action   under   Rule   3   has   been   taken   or   is   pending<\/p>\n<p>against   the   petitioner.     The   only   provision   on   which<\/p>\n<p>reliance can be placed by the respondent is Rule 3A(a)<\/p>\n<p>of   Part   III,   K.S.R.     If   departmental   proceedings   had<\/p>\n<p>been   instituted   and   the   same   is   continued,   the   above<\/p>\n<p>mentioned   rule   empowers   the   respondent   to   withhold<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WPC No.8866 \/2007                                 -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>terminal benefits including D.C.R.G., commuted value of<\/p>\n<p>pension and even pension.  The retired employee will be<\/p>\n<p>entitled   to   receive   only   a   provisional   pension.     But,<\/p>\n<p>the   said   Rule     will   be   attracted   only   in   cases   where<\/p>\n<p>departmental               or         judicial                proceedings         have         been<\/p>\n<p>instituted   and   are   pending   against   the   retired<\/p>\n<p>employee.     Admittedly,   no   departmental   proceedings   are<\/p>\n<p>pending.   What is pending is a vigilance enquiry.   The<\/p>\n<p>vigilance has not registered   a crime case and has not<\/p>\n<p>commenced   any   investigation   as   contemplated   by   the<\/p>\n<p>provisions   of   the   Code   of   Criminal   Procedure.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8216;Vigilance   enquiry&#8217;   will   not   come,   even   remotely,<\/p>\n<p>within         the         ambit            of         the          expression         judicial<\/p>\n<p>proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>     8.   Therefore,   it   is   evident   that   no   judicial<\/p>\n<p>proceeding   has   either   been   instituted   or   is   pending<\/p>\n<p>against   the   petitioner.       The   resultant   position   is<\/p>\n<p>that   the   petitioner   is   entitled   to   demand   that   the<\/p>\n<p>respondent shall pass orders sanctioning commuted value<\/p>\n<p>of pension and that the amount thus sanctioned shall be<\/p>\n<p>disbursed to him.   It is so declared.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WPC No.8866 \/2007                   -6-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        9.   The   writ   petition   is   allowed.     There   shall   be<\/p>\n<p>an   order   directing   the   respondent   to   sanction   and<\/p>\n<p>disburse the commuted value of pension legitimately due<\/p>\n<p>to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any<\/p>\n<p>rate,   within   two   months   from   the   date   of   receipt   of   a<\/p>\n<p>copy of the judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                     K.K. DENESAN<\/p>\n<p>                                                         JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>jan\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 8866 of 2007(E) 1. R.RAJA GOPALAN, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.G.SUDHEER For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN Dated :28\/03\/2007 O R [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-68339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - 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\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-29T17:32:47+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T17:32:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\"},\"wordCount\":936,\"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\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\",\"name\":\"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-29T17:32:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - 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\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-29T17:32:47+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007","datePublished":"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T17:32:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007"},"wordCount":936,"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\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007","name":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-29T17:32:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-raja-gopalan-vs-travancore-devaswom-board-on-28-march-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Raja Gopalan vs Travancore Devaswom Board on 28 March, 2007"}]},{"@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\/68339","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=68339"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68339\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}