{"id":69307,"date":"1973-10-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1973-10-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973"},"modified":"2019-02-28T09:58:27","modified_gmt":"2019-02-28T04:28:27","slug":"state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","title":{"rendered":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1974 AIR 19, \t\t 1974 SCR (1) 858<\/div>\n
Author: K K Mathew<\/div>\n
Bench: Mathew, Kuttyil Kurien<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSTATE OF MYSORE AND ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nH. D. KOLKAR\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT10\/10\/1973\n\nBENCH:\nMATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN\nBENCH:\nMATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN\nBEG, M. HAMEEDULLAH\nMUKHERJEA, B.K.\n\nCITATION:\n 1974 AIR   19\t\t  1974 SCR  (1) 858\n 1974 SCC  (3)\t46\n\n\nACT:\nBombay\tPolice\tAct,  1951--Section  25(2)(a),\t 25(c)--Rule\n17--Rule 17(2) investing the State Government with power  to\nenhance the punishment whether ultra vires S. 25(c).\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nSub-section  2(a) of s. 25 of the Bombay Police\t Act,  1951,\ninter alia authorises the Superintendent of Police to impose\nthe  punishment\t mentioned in subclause (1)  on\t any  Police\nofficer subordinate to him.  By clause (c) of s. 25(2)\t\"the\nexercise  of any power conferred\" by subsection 2(a)  \"shall\nbe subject always to such rules and orders as may be made by\nthe  State Government\" in this behalf.\tIn exercise  of\t the\npower conferred under clause (c) the State Government framed\nRule  17(2)  of the Bombay Police (Punishment  am(]  Appeal)\nRule-,,\t 1956, by which the Government invested itself\twith\nthe  power to call for records and to revise  orders  passed\nunder  sub-section  2(a)  of  s.  25  and  to  enhance\t the\npunishment.\nPursuant to disciplinary proceedings against the respondent,\na  head constable, the Superintendent of Police demoted\t him\nas a police constable.\tThe appeal to the D.I.G. police\t was\ndismissed.   The respondent, thereafter, filet[\t a  revision\nbefore\tthe  State Government under Rule 17  of\t the  Bombay\nPolice (punishment and appeal)Rules, 1956.  The\t Government,\nthereafter  issued  a show cause notice\t to  the  respondent\nstating\t as  to why the punishment imposed upon him  by\t the\nS.P.  should not be enhanced.  After hearing the  respondent\nthe Government enhanced the punishment to one of dismissal.\nRespondent filed a writ petition before the High Court.\t  He\nurged  that  (i)  the  disciplinary  proceedings  were\t not\nconducted  in accordance with law and (ii) that\t enhancement\nof  punishment was beyond the competence of the\t Government,\nas Rule 17(2) was ultra vires s. 25(c) of the Bombay  Police\nAct,  1951.   The  High Court  held  that  the\tdisciplinary\nproceedings  were conducted in accordance with law, but\t the\nGovernment  had no jurisdiction to enhance  the\t punishment.\nThe  Court,  therefore\tquashed\t the  order  of\t the   Govt.\nenhancing  the punishment.  The State appealed.\t  Dismissing\nthe appeal,\nHELD  :It is clear from the language of cl. (c) of s.  25(2)\nthat  only  rul and orders which could be  made\t under\tthat\nclause\tare rules and orders for the exercise of  the  power\nconferred by s. 25(2).\tThe words \"the exercise of any power\nconferred by the sub-section shall be subject always to such\nrules and orders is may be made by the State Government\", in\ns.  25(2)(c),  would indicate that the\tGovernment  have  no\npower to make any rule and under arrogating to themselves  a\npower  of revision over an order of punishment passed  under\ns.  25(2)(a).  What is made subject to the rules and  orders\nis  \"the exercise of any power\" conferred under clause\t2(a)\nof s. 25.  Sub-section 2 (c) of s. 25 can only mean that the\nGovernment  will  have power to pass rules  and\t orders\t for\nregulating  the\t procedure  or such other  matters  for\t the\nexercise of the power conferred by sub-section 2(a) of s. 25\nby the officers mentioned therein.  The power to enhance the\npunishment is a power which can be exercised only after\t the\nconcerned officer has exercised his power under s. 25(2)(a).\nIn  other  words,  rules  or  orders  can  be  made  by\t the\nGovernment tinder s. 25(2)(c) only for guiding him either in\nthe  matter of procedure, -of. the manner of arriving  at  a\ndecision.  It is obvious from the language of 25(2)(a)\tthat\nwhile that power exercisable under s. 25(2)(a) is subject to\nrules  and  orders  made by  the  Government,  the  decision\nwhich . comes into being after the exercise of that power is\nnot subject to the supervision of the Government by  framing\na  rule or order making an order in that behalf.   Once\t the\nexercise  of  such  power results in  the  imposition  of  a\npunishment, the punishment becomes final, subject only to an\nappeal which is authorised under S. 27.\t The consequense  is\nthat rule 17(2) of the rules by which the Government  sought\nto  acquire  power  to call for the records  and  to  revise\norders passed\n859\nunder  s. 25(2) (a) and to enhance the\tpunishment  imposed,\nwas clearly beyond its competence. [861 D]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal  No.  2117  of
\n1968.\n<\/p>\n
From  the  judgment and order dated April 16,  1968  of\t the
\nMysore Court in W.P. No. 2545 of 1965.\n<\/p>\n
S.V.Gupte and R. B. Datar for the appellants.
\nV. Mayakrishnan and N. R. Choudhury, for the respondent.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nMATHEW, J.-The respondent in this appeal started service  as
\na  police  constable  in the State of Bombay  in  1935.\t  He
\nbecame an head constable after he was allotted to the  State
\nof  Mysore consequent oil the reorganization of the  states.
\nIn  the year 1962, disciplinary proceedings  were  commenced
\nagainst him.  The charge was that he was found missing\tfrom
\nhis post between 11.30 P.M. on March 21, 1962 and 3.30\tP.M.
\non  the\t next day.  The Superintendent of Police  found\t him
\nguilty of the charge and demoted him as a police constable.
\nThe  respondent preferred an appeal to the Deputy  Inspector
\nGeneral\t of Police but that was dismissed.   The  respondent
\nthen filed a revision before the State Government under rule
\n17 of the Bombay Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1956,
\nhereinafter  called the “Rules”.  The Government  thereafter
\nissued a show cause notice to the respondent stating why the
\npunishment imposed upon him by the Superintendent of  Police
\nshould\tnot be enhanced.  After hearing the respondent,\t the
\npunishment   was  enhanced  to\tone  of\t dismissal  by\t the
\nGovernment.\n<\/p>\n
The  respondent filed a writ petition before the High  Court
\nof Mysore to quash the order.  He raised two grounds in\t the
\nwrit  petition: (1) that the disciplinary  proceedings\twere
\nnot  conducted\tin  accordance with law; and  (2)  that\t the
\nenhancement  of punishment was beyond the competence of\t the
\nGovernment  as rule 17 (2) of the Rules was  ultra vires  of
\ns.  25(2)(c)  of  the Bombay Police  Act,  1951\t hereinafter
\ncalled the ‘Act’.\n<\/p>\n
The  High Court held that the disciplinary proceedings\twere
\nconducted  in accordance with law, but that  the  Government
\nhad  no jurisdiction to enhance the punishment.\t  The  Court
\ntherefore quashed the order of the Government enhancing\t the
\npunishment.   It is against this order that the\t appeal\t has
\nbeen preferred, on certificate, by the State of Mysore.
\nThe  appellant contended that rule 17(2) of the Rules  which
\nauthorized  the State Government to call for the records  of
\nany  case in which an order has been passed by an  authority
\nsubordinate  to it and enhance the punishment  inflicted  by
\nthe order was not ultra vires s.25(2) (c) of the Act.
\nIt  is,\t therefore, necessary to read s. 25 of the  Act\t and
\nrule 17(2) of the Rules.  The material part of s. 25 reads:\n<\/p>\n
860<\/span><\/p>\n
“25(l)\tThe  State Government or any officer  authorised  by
\nsub-section (2) in that behalf may suspend, reduce,  dismiss
\nor  remove  an inspector or any member\tof  the\t subordinate
\nranks  of  the\tPolice\tForce whom  he\tshall  think  cruel,
\nperverse,  remiss or negligent in the discharge of his\tduty
\nor  unfit  for\tthe  same, and may fine\t to  an\t amount\t not
\nexceeding  one\tmonth’s pay, any member of  the\t subordinate
\nranks  of the Police Force, who is guilty of any  breach  of
\ndiscipline or misconduct or any act rendering him unfit\t for
\nthe  discharge\tof  his duty, which  does  not\trequire\t his
\nsuspension or dismissal.\n<\/p>\n
(2)  (a)  The Inspector-General, the  Commissioner  and\t the
\nDeputy\tInspector General shall have authority to punish  an
\nInspector or any member of the subordinate ranks under\tsub-
\nsection (1).  A Superintendent shall have the like authority
\nin  respect of any Police Officer subordinate to  him  below
\nthe  grade of Inspector and may suspend an Inspector who  is
\nsubordinate to him pending inquiry into a complaint  against
\nsuch  Inspector and until an order of the Inspector  General
\nor Deputy Inspector-General can be obtained.\n<\/p>\n
(c) The exercise of any power conferred by this\t sub-section
\nshall  be subject always to such rules and orders as may  be
\nmade by the State Government in that behalf.”
\nRule 17 of the Rules reads:\n<\/p>\n
”  1.  The State Government shall alone have  the  power  of
\nrevision  and revision shall lie only in respect of  punish-
\nments which are appellate.\n<\/p>\n
(2)  The State Government, of its own motion  or  otherwise.
\nmay  call for the record of any case in which an  order\t has
\nbeen made by an authority subordinate to it in the  exercise
\nof  any power conferred on such authority by the  Rules\t and
\nmay:\n<\/p>\n
(a) confirm, modify, or reverse the order, or\n<\/p>\n
(b) direct that further enquiry be held in the case;\n<\/p>\n
(c) reduce or enhance the punishment inflicted by the order;\n<\/p>\n
(d) make such other order in the case as it may deem fit.
\nProvided that where it is proposed to enhance the punishment
\ninflicted  by any such order, the Police  Officer  concerned
\nshall be given -in opportunity of showing cause against\t the
\nproposed enhancement.”\n<\/p>\n
It  is\tclear from sub-section (1) of S. 25 that  the  State
\nGovernment or any officer authorised by the State Government
\nunder sub-section (2) of that section is competent to impose
\nthe  punishment\t of  suspension,  reduction,  dismissal\t  or
\nremoval\t on an Inspector or other member of the\t subordinate
\nrank  of the Police force on the grounds enumerated in\tthat
\nsection.  Sub-section 2(a) consists of two parts.  The first
\npart  authorises  the  Inspector  General  of  Police,\t the
\nCommissioner, and the Deputy Inspector General of Police  to
\nimpose\tpunishment which the State Government  could  impose
\nunder sub-section (1).\tThe
\n861<\/span>
\nother part of that sub-section says that a Superintendent of
\nPolice\tshall  have  the like authority in  respect  of\t any
\nPolice\tOfficer\t subordinate,  to him  below  the  grade  of
\nInspector.   It was in the exercise of this power  that\t the
\nSuperintendent of Police here reduced the respondent to\t the
\nrank of a police constable.\n<\/p>\n
Now the source of the power under which rule 17 was  framed,
\nas stated in the preamble to the rules, is sub-section\t2(c)
\nof s. 25 of the Act and the question is whether this  clause
\nreally authorised the Government to acquire power by framing
\na  rule to enhance the punishment imposed under\t sub-section
\n2(a) of S. 25.\n<\/p>\n
As  already stated, the High Court was of the  opinion\tthat
\nthe subsection could confer no authority to frame a rule, to
\ninvest\tthe  Government\t with power to revise  an  order  of
\npunishment made under S. 25 (2) (a).\n<\/p>\n
It is clear from the language of clause (c) of s.25 (2) that
\nonly rules and orders which could be made under that  clause
\nare rules and orders for the exercise of the power conferred
\nby  S.\t25 (2) (a).  The words “the exercise  of  any  power
\nconferred by this subsection shall be subject always to such
\nrules and orders as may be made by the State Government”  in
\nS.  25\t(2) (c) would indicate that the Government  have  no
\npower  to make any rule or order arrogating to themselves  a
\npower  of revision over an order of punishment passed  under
\ns.25(2)(a).  What is made subject to the rules or orders  to
\nbe  passed  or made by Government is “the  exercise  of\t any
\npower” conferred under clause 2(a) of s.25. Sub-section 2(c)
\nof s.25 can only mean that the Goverment will have power  to
\npass  rules or orders for regulating the procedure  or\tsuch
\nother  matters\tfor the exercise of the power  conferred  by
\nsub-section  (2)  (a)  of s.25\tby  the\t officers  mentioned
\ntherein.   The\tpower to enhance the punishment is  a  power
\nwhich can be exercised only after the concerned officer\t has
\nexercised his power under s.25(2) (a).\tIn   other    words,
\nrules or orders can be made by Government under\t  s.25(a)(c)
\nonly  for guiding him either in the matter of procedure,  or
\nthe  manner of arriving at a decision.\tIt is  obvious\tfrom
\nthe language of s.25(2)(c) that while the power\t exercisable
\nunder  s.25 (2) (a) is subject to the rules and orders\tmade
\nby Government, the decision which comes into being after the
\nexercise of that power is not subject to the supervision  of
\nthe  Goverment by framing a rule or making an order in\tthat
\nbehalf.\t  Once\tthe exercise of such power  results  in\t the
\nimposition  of\ta punishment, the punishment  becomes  final
\nsubject only to an appeal which is authorised by s. 27.\t The
\nconsequence  is that rule 17(2) of the Rules, by  which\t the
\nGovernment  sought to acquire power to call for the  records
\nand  to\t revise\t orders passed under s.25  (2)\t(a)  and  to
\nenhance\t the  punishment  imposed, was\tclearly\t beyond\t its
\ncompetence.\n<\/p>\n
We dismiss the appeal with costs.\n<\/p>\n
S.C.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\tAppeal dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 Equivalent citations: 1974 AIR 19, 1974 SCR (1) 858 Author: K K Mathew Bench: Mathew, Kuttyil Kurien PETITIONER: STATE OF MYSORE AND ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: H. D. KOLKAR DATE OF JUDGMENT10\/10\/1973 BENCH: MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN BENCH: MATHEW, KUTTYIL […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-69307","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - 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\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\" \/>\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=\"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973\",\"datePublished\":\"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\"},\"wordCount\":1415,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\",\"name\":\"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - 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\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973","datePublished":"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973"},"wordCount":1415,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973","name":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1973-10-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-28T04:28:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-mysore-and-ors-vs-h-d-kolkar-on-10-october-1973#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Mysore And Ors vs H. D. Kolkar on 10 October, 1973"}]},{"@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\/69307","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=69307"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69307\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69307"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69307"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69307"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}