{"id":71267,"date":"2010-08-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010"},"modified":"2014-05-29T10:03:06","modified_gmt":"2014-05-29T04:33:06","slug":"t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 25624 of 2010(C)\n\n\n1. T.N.VALSALAN, THACHORAKKAL HOUSE,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE KOZHIKODE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, KOZHIKODE\n\n3. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER\/ASSISTANT\n\n4. THE STATE  CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.P.JACOB\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.T.A.SHAJI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN\n\n Dated :19\/08\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.\n             -------------------------------------------\n                W.P.(C) No.25624 of 2010\n             -------------------------------------------\n             Dated this the 19th August, 2010\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>     The petitioner is a member of the first respondent<\/p>\n<p>Society. He has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P2<\/p>\n<p>notification proposing to hold an election to the Managing<\/p>\n<p>Committee of the first petitioner bank on 29.8.2010. As<\/p>\n<p>per Ext.P2, the election is proposed to be conducted from<\/p>\n<p>five separate electoral constituencies delimited by the said<\/p>\n<p>notification. The total number of members to be elected is<\/p>\n<p>&#8216;9&#8217;.  According to the petitioner, the delimitation of<\/p>\n<p>constituencies in Ext.P2 has been done by the Managing<\/p>\n<p>Committee in violation of the bye-laws of the Society. The<\/p>\n<p>bye-laws of the Society could be amended only by the<\/p>\n<p>general body and therefore, the action of the Managing<\/p>\n<p>Committee is attacked as being absolutely without<\/p>\n<p>authority and liable to be set aside.              Further, as per<\/p>\n<p>Ext.P2, two seats are reserved for women, which also is<\/p>\n<p>alleged to be without the authority of the general body.<\/p>\n<p>The petitioner, therefore, prays for setting aside Ext.P2<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010         2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   notification.\n<\/p>\n<p>         2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the<\/p>\n<p>   first respondent-Society. In paragraph-5 of the counter<\/p>\n<p>   affidavit what is stated is that in view of the amendment to<\/p>\n<p>   Section 28A of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act,<\/p>\n<p>   1969, (the &#8216;Act&#8217; for short), as per the Amendment Act No.7<\/p>\n<p>   of 2010 that came into force on 28.4.2010, the number of<\/p>\n<p>   women members has been enhanced to three.\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;Therefore, there is a statutory compulsion to<br \/>\n           reserve three seats for women. The new<br \/>\n           elected committee has to assume office<br \/>\n           immediately. Therefore, it was not at all<br \/>\n           feasible to convene a general body and make<br \/>\n           consequential amendments in the bye-laws.<br \/>\n           However, by virtue of the amended provisions<br \/>\n           in Section 28A of the Act three seats are to be<br \/>\n           reserved for women. Therefore, out of exigency<br \/>\n           of     the situation  and     due   to  statutory<br \/>\n           compulsion the Managing Committee resolved<br \/>\n           to give effect to the provisions of the Act,<br \/>\n           without which the election could not be held.<br \/>\n           Accordingly, it has been resolved to reserve<br \/>\n           two more seats out of the existing general<br \/>\n           seats for women and territorial limits of those<br \/>\n           constituencies are determined by spreading<br \/>\n           over the same to that of the existing general<br \/>\n           seats. This measure is the only feasible way.<br \/>\n           Nobody is prejudiced. No right of the members<br \/>\n           residing in any part of the area of operation of<br \/>\n           the Bank has been affected. All members are<br \/>\n           entitled to vote for the candidates in all the<br \/>\n           nine constituencies. Nobody&#8217;s right to contest<br \/>\n           form the general candidates is affected as<br \/>\n           well.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010        3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   The explanation, therefore, is that since the term of the<\/p>\n<p>   Managing Committee is to expire on 3.9.2010, there was<\/p>\n<p>   no sufficient time to convene a general body and to amend<\/p>\n<p>   the bye-laws before the conduct of the election. For the<\/p>\n<p>   above reason, it is contended that the Managing<\/p>\n<p>   Committee has delimited the constituencies on their own.<\/p>\n<p>         3. Adv.P.P.Jacob who appears for the petitioner relies<\/p>\n<p>   on Sections 27 and 28 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies<\/p>\n<p>   Act, 1969 to contend that the supreme body as far any Co-<\/p>\n<p>   operative Society is concerned is the general body thereof.<\/p>\n<p>   As per Rule 35A(3)(ii), any area or constituency that is<\/p>\n<p>   specified in the bye-laws from which the members are to<\/p>\n<p>   be elected is also to be specified in an election notification.<\/p>\n<p>   The above rule presupposes that the constituency that is<\/p>\n<p>   specified should be delimited by the bye-laws. Rule 5(1)(s)<\/p>\n<p>   provides that the conduct of elections to the committee<\/p>\n<p>   and other bodies of the Society as provided in the bye-laws<\/p>\n<p>   including the right of the members to be elected by<\/p>\n<p>   different constituencies and appointment of the Returning<\/p>\n<p>   Officer are matters with respect to which the bye-laws of a<\/p>\n<p>   Society may make provision for. Therefore, it is the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010        4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   General Body that is empowered to alter the bye-laws.<\/p>\n<p>         4. However, it is pointed out that since Section 28A<\/p>\n<p>   of the Act has been introduced, making provision for the<\/p>\n<p>   reservation of three seats instead of one for women<\/p>\n<p>   candidates, the mandate of the statute had to be complied<\/p>\n<p>   with before the elections could be conducted. Therefore,<\/p>\n<p>   in the exigencies of the circumstances, the Managing<\/p>\n<p>   Committee had done the task of delimitation of the<\/p>\n<p>   constituency. A similar issue had arisen for consideration<\/p>\n<p>   before a Division Bench of this Court in the decision<\/p>\n<p>   reported in Udayakaran v Ahammedkannu (2004(2)<\/p>\n<p>   KLT 969 [D.B.]). After considering the question, Cyriac<\/p>\n<p>   Joseph, J. (as he then was) has concluded the issue at<\/p>\n<p>   page 973 thereof, as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>          &#8220;12.     It is not disputed that the authority<br \/>\n          competent to make and amend the bye-law is<br \/>\n          the General Body of the Society. S.27 of the Act<br \/>\n          also says that subject to the provisions of the<br \/>\n          Act, the Rules and the bye-laws, the final<br \/>\n          authority of a society shall vest in the General<br \/>\n          Body of the members.         Therefore, in the<br \/>\n          absence of necessary provisions in the Act<br \/>\n          specifying the authority and the criteria to<br \/>\n          determine the ward\/constituency for reservation<br \/>\n          under S.28A, it is for the General body of a<br \/>\n          Society to make necessary provisions in the bye-<br \/>\n          laws of the society for the reservation under<br \/>\n          S.28A or specifying the authority competent to<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010          5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          determine and laying down the criteria for such<br \/>\n          determination. Since the Committee of a Society<br \/>\n          is not competent to amend the bye-laws of the<br \/>\n          Society, unless specified in the bye-laws the<br \/>\n          Committee is not competent to determine the<br \/>\n          ward or constituency for reservation under<br \/>\n          S.28A or to lay down the criteria for such<br \/>\n          determination.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>           13. Moreover, there is an inherent danger in<br \/>\n           conceding such arbitrary power to an existing<br \/>\n           committee of the Society to determine the<br \/>\n           constituency to be reserved under S.28A. If<br \/>\n           such a power is conceded to the Committee,<br \/>\n           the existing members of the Committee may<br \/>\n           arbitrarily exercise that power to reserve the<br \/>\n           constituency\/ward to their advantage of their<br \/>\n           opponents. Such a situation will not be in the<br \/>\n           best interest of the Society or in accordance<br \/>\n           with the spirit of the provisions of the Act.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         5. The dictum referred to above apply on all fours to<\/p>\n<p>   the facts to the present case. As cautioned by the Division<\/p>\n<p>   Bench in paragraph-13 above, to concede the power to<\/p>\n<p>   delimit electoral constituencies without amending the bye-<\/p>\n<p>   laws to the Managing Committee, usurping the powers of<\/p>\n<p>   the    General    Body     would   be   lead   to   dangerous<\/p>\n<p>   consequences.\n<\/p>\n<p>         6. Adv.T.A.Shaji who appears for the first respondent<\/p>\n<p>   has been at considerable strain to defend the action of the<\/p>\n<p>   Managing Committee by pointing out that the Committee<\/p>\n<p>   had acted in the best interests of all concerned. It is also<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010       6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   pointed out that no prejudice whatsoever has been caused<\/p>\n<p>   to any one by the delimitation of the constituencies as<\/p>\n<p>   undertaken by the Managing Committee. Even assuming<\/p>\n<p>   that the above arguments are true, in the present case the<\/p>\n<p>   Managing Committee has delimited the constituencies in<\/p>\n<p>   one particular manner. It is not necessary that the General<\/p>\n<p>   Body should adopt the very same method of delimitation.<\/p>\n<p>   What is the course best suited for the first respondent<\/p>\n<p>   Society is to be decided by the General Body which is the<\/p>\n<p>   competent body and not by the Managing Committee. The<\/p>\n<p>   said right of the General Body cannot be usurped by the<\/p>\n<p>   Managing Committee, whatever be the compelling<\/p>\n<p>   circumstances.\n<\/p>\n<p>         7. It is further pointed out that though 22<\/p>\n<p>   nominations were received, all the nominations except<\/p>\n<p>   nine were rejected for one or the other reason and<\/p>\n<p>   therefore, there is no contest to the valid nominations that<\/p>\n<p>   are now received. Consequently, only the formality of<\/p>\n<p>   declaring the results of the election remains, to complete<\/p>\n<p>   the election process. For the above reason, it is contended<\/p>\n<p>   that the petitioner may be relegated to the remedy of filing<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010        7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   an election petition, if he has any grievance.<\/p>\n<p>         8. In the present case, the foundation of the election<\/p>\n<p>   itself is bad since the election notification Ext.P2 is liable<\/p>\n<p>   to be set aside. There is no point in perpetuating the<\/p>\n<p>   illegality by postponing the invalidation of the action.<\/p>\n<p>   Since the very foundation of the act is wrong, the<\/p>\n<p>   subsequent procedures adopted are also wrong and<\/p>\n<p>   cannot be justified on any count.\n<\/p>\n<p>         9. It is further submitted by Adv.T.A.Shaji that since<\/p>\n<p>   the term of the Managing Committee is to expire on<\/p>\n<p>   3.9.2010, the said Committee may be permitted to<\/p>\n<p>   continue in office as administrators. A direction issued by<\/p>\n<p>   this Court in an earlier writ petition, W.P.(C) No.19719 of<\/p>\n<p>   2005, confirmed by the judgment in Writ Appeal No.1616<\/p>\n<p>   of 2005 is relied on in support to the above submission. In<\/p>\n<p>   the present case, no orders have been passed appointing<\/p>\n<p>   an Administrative Committee for the first respondent since<\/p>\n<p>   the term of the Managing Committee is not yet over.<\/p>\n<p>   However, Rule 39 is a clear bar against such a course of<\/p>\n<p>   action. Sub Rule 2 of Rule 39 specifically stipulates that<\/p>\n<p>   all members of the Managing Committee shall vacate their<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010          8<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   office on the expiry of the term of the Committee,<\/p>\n<p>   irrespective of the date on which they were elected as<\/p>\n<p>   members of the Committee. The propriety of permitting<\/p>\n<p>   the Managing Committee of a Society, whose term has<\/p>\n<p>   expired, to continue as the Administrative Committee of<\/p>\n<p>   the Society has been considered by a Division Bench of<\/p>\n<p>   this Court in Joint Registrar v Chatha (1999(3) KLT<\/p>\n<p>   139). After referring to the various decisions on the point,<\/p>\n<p>   this Court has concluded the question in paragraph-4 of<\/p>\n<p>   the judgment in the following words:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;This court, in all the decisions referred to<br \/>\n             earlier, has only directed the Registrar of<br \/>\n             Co-operative    Societies     to   appoint    an<br \/>\n             Administrator     or       Administrators      in<br \/>\n             accordance with the provisions contained in<br \/>\n             S.33 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies<br \/>\n             Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that<br \/>\n             the judgment of the learned Single Judge, in<br \/>\n             so far as it directs the present Board to be<br \/>\n             appointed as Administrative Committee till<br \/>\n             the election is over, is liable to be set aside.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>         In view of the above, the request of the counsel for<\/p>\n<p>   the first respondent can only be rejected.<\/p>\n<p>         10. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is<\/p>\n<p>   allowed. Ext.P2 is set aside. It is made clear that a fresh<\/p>\n<p>   notification for the conduct of election of the Managing<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">wpc No.25624 of 2010    9<\/span><\/p>\n<p>   Committee of the Society may be issued after effecting<\/p>\n<p>   necessary amendments to the bye-laws in conformity with<\/p>\n<p>   the mandate under Section 28A of the Act. No costs.<\/p>\n<p>                               K.SURENDRA MOHAN,<br \/>\n                                       JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>   css\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 25624 of 2010(C) 1. T.N.VALSALAN, THACHORAKKAL HOUSE, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. THE KOZHIKODE PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE &#8230; Respondent 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER, KOZHIKODE 3. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER\/ASSISTANT 4. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION For Petitioner [&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-71267","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - 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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-29T04:33:06+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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-29T04:33:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1743,\"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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\",\"name\":\"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-29T04:33:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - 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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-29T04:33:06+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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-29T04:33:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010"},"wordCount":1743,"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\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010","name":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary ... on 19 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-29T04:33:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-n-valsalan-vs-the-kozhikode-primary-on-19-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.N.Valsalan vs The Kozhikode Primary &#8230; on 19 August, 2010"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/71267","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=71267"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71267\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71267"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71267"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71267"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}