{"id":92211,"date":"2009-09-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009"},"modified":"2015-04-03T13:43:21","modified_gmt":"2015-04-03T08:13:21","slug":"s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED :  15\/09\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN\n\nW.P.(MD)No.9000  of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.1 of  2009\n\nS.Arasappan                                    ...   Petitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.The Secretary to Government,\n   Departmental Promotion Committee\n   for Empanelment and Promotion as\n   Assistant Conservators for the year 2008-2009\n   rep. Environment and Forests Department,\n   Fort St. George,\n   Chennai-600 009.\n\n2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,\n   Panagal Buildings,\n   Chennai-600 015.\n\n3.The Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,\n   [Forest Administration]\n   O\/o.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,\n   Chennai-600 015.\n\n4.The Conservator of Forests,\n   Virudhunagar Circle,\n   Virudhunagar.                                  ...  Respondents\n\n\nWrit Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for\nthe records relating to the orders in [1]Pro,No.Aa.Aa.3\/68157\/1\/07, dated\n21.05.2008 of the third respondent and [2] Pro.No.C\/2867\/07, dated 31.05.2007 of\nthe fourth respondent to quash the same and to issue consequentially directions\nto the respondents 1 and 2 to include the name of the petitioner in the\nappropriate place in the ensuing panel as Assistant Conservator of Forests for\nthe year 2008-2009 and to consequently promote the petitioner as such with all\nbenefits, notwithstanding and without reference to the order of punishment in\nPro.C\/2867\/07, dated 31.05.2007 of the fourth respondent as confirmed by the\nthird respondent in Pro.Aa.Aa.3\/68157\/1\/07, dated 21.05.2008 .\n\n\n!For Petitioner         ... Mr.M.Ravi\n^For Respondents        ... Mr.K.Balasubramanian\n                            Additional Government Pleader\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tHeard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.The petitioner was appointed as Forester and joined service in Arasu<br \/>\nRubber Corporation Ltd. Nagercoil on 21.02.1980.  Thereafter, he was directly<br \/>\nrecruited through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission as Forest Ranger and<br \/>\nhe worked as Forest Ranger, Social Forestry Range, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar<br \/>\nDivision from 01.11.2002 to 08.06.2005. In respect of certain lapses in the<br \/>\nexecution of TAP works known as Malaiyapuram Abedkar Nagar Project Works 2004-<br \/>\n2005 and consequent loss to the Government, the Division Forest Officer, Social<br \/>\nForestry Range, Virudhnagar Division, by his proceedings, dated 06.03.2007<br \/>\nissued a show cause memo under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D &amp;<br \/>\nA) Rule.  The petitioner submitted his reply, dated 17.04.2007 wherein he has<br \/>\nstated that he was not responsible for any such lapses,  but the 4th respondent<br \/>\nwithout considering the reply of the petitioner in proper perspective, based on<br \/>\nthe remarks by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sapthur Range, passed orders on<br \/>\n31.05.2007 imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for two years<br \/>\nwithout any cumulative effect.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed appeal to the Additional<br \/>\nPrincipal Chief Conservator of Forests (Forest Administration) Chennai, and the<br \/>\nsaid Authority also rejected the appeal, by his proceedings in<br \/>\nPro.No.Aa.Aa.3\/68157-1\/07, dated 21.05.2008, which is challenged in this writ<br \/>\npetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.Mr. M.Ravi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted<br \/>\nthat the 3rd respondent without passing any speaking order and without<br \/>\napplication of mind, rejected the appeal and it is against the principles<br \/>\nsettled by this Court.  He further contended that one Mr.I.Subramanian, who was<br \/>\nalso charged for the same misconduct and was imposed with the same penalty,<br \/>\nfiled the appeal before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent modified the<br \/>\norder of punishment and imposed strict warning and set aside the order of<br \/>\nstoppage of increment with cumulative effect.  Further he was also given<br \/>\npromotion whereas the petitioner&#8217;s appeal was rejected and he was not given<br \/>\npromotion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon the<br \/>\njudgement of this Honourable court reported in 2008 Writ L.R.86 in the cae of\n<\/p>\n<p>1.the Joint Commissioenr of Police, Traffic zone,<a href=\"\/doc\/1686643\/\">Vepery, Chennai,2.The Deputy<br \/>\nCommissioner of Police, Traffic (North) Vepery, Chennai-7 vs. G.Anandan PC<\/a> 12163<br \/>\nand in W.P.No.28396 of 2008 and W.P.No.23751 of 2008 and submitted that in those<br \/>\njudgments, it has been held that the punishment of stoppage of two increment<br \/>\nwithout cumulative effect for two years is not a major punishment and therefore,<br \/>\neven assuming that the appeal has been rejected, he can be considered for<br \/>\npromotion during the currency of punishment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.The learned Additional Government Pleader, submitted that it is not<br \/>\ncorrect to state that Mr.I.Subramanian was left off with a strict warning only.<br \/>\nAccordingly to the learned Additional Government Pleader,  the order of the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent in letting of Mr.I.Subramanian with strict warning was reviewed and<br \/>\nwas set aside as per the Rule 35 and the original punishment was restored.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.According to the learned Additional Government Pleader, there is no<br \/>\ninfirmity in the order passed by the respondents and after giving sufficient<br \/>\nopportunities and on the basis of the records, the order was passed and there is<br \/>\nno need to conduct any enquiry, as action was initiated under 17-A of the Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,<br \/>\nMr.M.Ravi, having regard to the judgments relied upon by him as stated above,<br \/>\neven assuming that the charges are proved and the punishment was proper, it<br \/>\nwould not stand in the  way of giving promotion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.In the judgments referred to above, the learned Judge relied upon the<br \/>\njudmgnent in 2008(5)MLJ 350 in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1581533\/\">Subramanian v. Government of Tamil<br \/>\nNadu,<\/a> rep by its Secretary, Chennai and others and as per the judgment rendered<br \/>\nby this court, it is made clear that the punishment awarded to  the petitioner<br \/>\nviz., stoppage of increment for two years without cumulative effect should be<br \/>\nconsidered as a minor punishment and the currency of the punishment should not<br \/>\ndis-entitle the petitioner from claiming the promotion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.It is further seen that the original punishment imposed on<br \/>\nMr.I.Subramanian was also restored in the review petition.  However, the 3rd<br \/>\nrespondent, while considering the appeal filed by the petitioner has summarily<br \/>\nrejected the appeal without giving any finding and it is also a non speaking<br \/>\norder. It has been held in the judgment reported in 2006(3) CTC 669 (SC) in the<br \/>\ncase of Director (Mkt) I.O.C. Ltd., vs, Santosh Kumar and in 2008(6) MLJ 882, in<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/432839\/\">T.Bapuraj vs. Commissioner of Police, Chennai and others<\/a> that non<br \/>\nspeaking order of the appellate authority is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.Therefore, the order of the 3rd respondent is set aside and the 3rd<br \/>\nrespondent is directed to consider the appeal of the petitioner on merits.<br \/>\nHaving regard to the fact that even assuming that the petitioner has suffered<br \/>\nthe punishment of stoppage of increment for  two years without cumulative<br \/>\neffect, as per the judgement of this Honourable court as referred to above, the<br \/>\npunishment is a minor punishment and hence, that would not stand in the way of<br \/>\nconsidering the case of the petitioner for promotion and hence, the respondents<br \/>\n1 and 2 are directed to consider the name of the petitioner for promotion,<br \/>\nincluding his name in the promotion panel, as Asst. conservator of Forest for<br \/>\nthe year 2008-2009 .\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.With the above observations, the writ petition is allowed.<br \/>\nConsequently, connected miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>er<\/p>\n<p>To,<\/p>\n<p>1.The Secretary to Government,<br \/>\n   Departmental Promotion Committee<br \/>\n   for Empanelment and Promotion as<br \/>\n   Assistant Conservators for the year 2008-2009<br \/>\n   rep. Environment and Forests Department,<br \/>\n   Fort St. George,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,<br \/>\n   Panagal Buildings,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 015.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,<br \/>\n   [Forest Administration]<br \/>\n   O\/o.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,<br \/>\n   Chennai-600 015.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Conservator of Forests,<br \/>\n   Virudhunagar Circle,<br \/>\n   Virudhunagar.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The Additional Government Pleader,<br \/>\n   Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,<br \/>\n   Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15\/09\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN W.P.(MD)No.9000 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2009 S.Arasappan &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1.The Secretary to Government, Departmental Promotion Committee for Empanelment and Promotion as Assistant Conservators [&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-92211","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>S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - 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\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-03T08:13:21+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-03T08:13:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1013,\"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\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\",\"name\":\"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-03T08:13:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - 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\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-03T08:13:21+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-03T08:13:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009"},"wordCount":1013,"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\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009","name":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-03T08:13:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-arasappan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-15-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S.Arasappan vs The Secretary To Government on 15 September, 2009"}]},{"@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\/92211","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=92211"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/92211\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=92211"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=92211"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=92211"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}