{"id":95067,"date":"2011-08-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011"},"modified":"2017-01-28T15:51:39","modified_gmt":"2017-01-28T10:21:39","slug":"r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 01\/08\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR\n\nWrit Petition (MD)No.8039 of 2011\n\nR.Karuppanan\t\t\t...\tPetitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.The Registrar General cum\n  The Principal Revenue Control Officer,\n  Chennai.\n\n2.The District Collector\n  Karur District,\n  Karur.\n\n3.The District Registrar,\n  Karur District,\n  Karur.\n\n4.The Sub Registrar\n  Melakarur,\n  Karur District.\n\n\n5.The Tahsildar,\n  Karur Taluk,\n  Karur.\t\t\t...\tRespondents\n\nPrayer\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the\nrecords pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent, dated\n28.06.2011 in Na.Ka.No.A3\/26523\/2010 and quash the same and consequently direct\nthe second respondent to reinstate the petitioner with backwages with all\nattendance benefits.\n\n!For petitioner ...Mr.R.Vijayakumar\n^For respondents...Mr.B.Pugalendhi\n\t\t   Special Government Pleader\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tChallenge in this writ petition is to quash the order dated 28.06.2011,<br \/>\npreventing the petitioner from discharging his duties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. According to the petitioner, he has been appointed as a Junior<br \/>\nAssistant on temporary basis on consolidated pay by the District Collector,<br \/>\nKarur District, the second respondent herein, by an order dated 07.07.2003. He<br \/>\nwas posted to Karur Registration Department. On 02.03.2009, a show cause notice<br \/>\nhas been issued by the Registrar General cum Principal Revenue Control Officer,<br \/>\nthe first respondent herein, alleging that on 18.02.2005, the Vigilance and Anti<br \/>\nCorruption Department conducted an inspection in the Sub Registrar&#8217;s office, and<br \/>\nthat the petitioner was found in possession of two pocket notes containing<br \/>\nentries of loan received for a sum of Rs.10,000\/- and Rs.8,000\/- each and that<br \/>\nthere were entries of daily repayment of Rs.200\/- and Rs.100\/- without prior<br \/>\npermission from the Department.  When the petitioner submitted an explanation<br \/>\nstating that the loan amount was received by his brother and mother-in-law and<br \/>\nnot by the petitioner and as the transaction was of the year 2005, no documents<br \/>\nwere available with any one of them and thus denied the charges and by an order,<br \/>\ndated 14.07.2010, the petitioner was transferred to the office of the Sub<br \/>\nRegistrar, Melakarur, Karur Taluk, the fourth respondent herein. Thereafter, the<br \/>\npetitioner, by impugned order, dated 28.06.2011, was terminated from service. On<br \/>\nthe abovesaid pleading, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the<br \/>\npunishment imposed, is violative of principles of natural justice and prayed for<br \/>\ninterference.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. When the matter came up for hearing on 27.07.2011, this Court directed,<br \/>\nMr.B.Pugalendhi, learned Special Government Pleader, to get appropriate<br \/>\ninstructions as to whether the termination of a temporary employee appointed on<br \/>\nconsolidated pay, without enquiry on the charges levelled against him, could be<br \/>\njustified in terms of any Government orders or rules. On this day, when the<br \/>\nmatter came up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader prayed time<br \/>\nto file counter affidavit. As the point involved is limited, and only a question<br \/>\nof law is involved, there is no reason as to why a counter affidavit is<br \/>\nrequired, when the facts are already available on record.  It is well settled in<br \/>\na writ of certiorari, counter affidavit is required, when there is a dispute in<br \/>\nfacts.  In view of the above, this Court is inclined to proceed with the case on<br \/>\nthe basis of available materials, on merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. Assailing the correctness of the above order, learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner submitted that the impugned order of the second respondent is in<br \/>\nviolation of the principles of natural justice, as no charge memo has been<br \/>\nissued and enquiry has been conducted by the second respondent.  He further<br \/>\nsubmitted that the order being stigmatic, the petitioner ought to have been<br \/>\nprovided with an opportunity of hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Going through the impugned order and the material on record, this Court<br \/>\nis of the considered view that even a temporary employee paid on consolidated<br \/>\npay is entitled to  have an  opportunity of hearing under Article 311(2) of the<br \/>\nConstitution of India. Merely because, the petitioner is a temporary employee<br \/>\npaid on consolidated salary, he cannot be deprived of the constitutional<br \/>\nprotection under Article 311(2) of the <a href=\"\/doc\/1352075\/\">Constitution of India.  In Nar Singh Pal<br \/>\nv. Union of India<\/a> reported in 2000 (3) SCC 558, the Apex Court, at Paragraphs<br \/>\n6,8 and 10, held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;The appellant, although a casual labour, had acquired temporary status.<br \/>\nOnce an employee attains the &#8220;temporary&#8221; status, he becomes entitled to certain<br \/>\nbenefits one of which is that he becomes entitled to the constitutional<br \/>\nprotection envisaged by Article 311 of the Constitution and other articles<br \/>\ndealing with services under the Union of India.  The services were terminated on<br \/>\naccount of the allegation of assault made against the appellant.  The order of<br \/>\ntermination in instant case, cannot be treated to be a simple order of<br \/>\nretrenchment.  It was an order passed by way of punishment and, therefore, was<br \/>\nan order of dismissal which, having been passed on the basis of preliminary<br \/>\ninquiry and without holding a regular departmental inquiry, cannot be<br \/>\nsustained.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. In the above reported case, the Apex Court has extracted the<br \/>\nobservations of Krishna Iyer, J. in <a href=\"\/doc\/609478\/\">Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd., v. Mazdoor Sabha<\/a><br \/>\nreported in 1980(2) SCC 593, at paragraph 53 and it is as follows:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;53.Masters and servants cannot be permitted to play hide and seek with<br \/>\nthe law of dismissals and the plain and proper criteria are not to be<br \/>\nmisdirected by terminological cover-ups or by appeal to psychic processes but<br \/>\nmust be grounded on the substantive reason for the order, whether disclosed or<br \/>\nundisclosed.  The Court will find out from other proceedings or documents<br \/>\nconnected with the formal order of termination what the true ground for the<br \/>\ntermination is.  If, thus scrutinised, the order has a punitive flavour in cause<br \/>\nor consequence, it is dismissal.  If it falls short of this test, it cannot be<br \/>\ncalled a punishment.  To put it slightly differently, a termination effected<br \/>\nbecause the master is satisfied of the misconduct and of the consequent<br \/>\ndesirability of terminating the service of the delinquent servant, is a<br \/>\ndismissal, even if he had the right in law to terminate with an innocent order<br \/>\nunder the standing order or otherwise. Whether, in such a case the grounds are<br \/>\nrecorded in a different proceeding from the formal order does not detract from<br \/>\nits nature.  Nor the fact that, after being satisfied of the guilt, the master<br \/>\nabandons the inquiry and proceeds to terminate.  Given an alleged misconduct and<br \/>\na live nexus between it and the termination of service the conclusion is<br \/>\ndismissal, even if full benefits as on simple termination, are given and non-<br \/>\ninjurious terminology is used.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Perusal of the Government order in G.O.(D2) No.165 Commercial Taxes and<br \/>\nRegistration Department (H2) Department, dated 18.09.2007, shows that after<br \/>\nconsidering the preliminary report, the Government have issued orders to take<br \/>\ndisciplinary action against one Assistant, two Junior Assistants and two office<br \/>\nassistants working in the office of the Sub Registrar, Mela Karur Taluk relating<br \/>\nto financial irregularities and in not maintaining proper accounts.  The<br \/>\nGovernment, have specifically directed, the Registrar General, Chennai-28, to<br \/>\nconduct disciplinary action as per the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and<br \/>\nAppeal) Rules and provide a reasonable opportunity to defend the charges. By<br \/>\ntaking a suo motu decision to the effect, that such procedure need not be<br \/>\nfollowed, in respect of temporary employees paid on consolidated pay, the<br \/>\nRegistrar General cum the Principal Revenue Control Officer, the first<br \/>\nrespondent herein, vide G.O.Letter No.10810\/V1\/2005, dated 08.10.2010, has<br \/>\naddressed a letter to the Government and accordingly terminated the services of<br \/>\nthe petitioner, without holding any regular enquiry.  Such an approach in the<br \/>\nopinion of this Court is opposed by the right of opportunity of hearing<br \/>\nguaranteed under Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.  Even a temporary<br \/>\nemployee has to be provided with an opportunity of hearing, when serious charges<br \/>\nare imputed against him.  Merely because, he is paid a consolidated salary, he<br \/>\ncannot be denied of the opportunity.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. For the reasons stated supra, this Court is inclined to set aside the<br \/>\nimpugned order, dated 28.06.2011. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside<br \/>\nand the writ petition is allowed and consequently a direction is issued to the<br \/>\nrespondents to reinstate the petitioner in service.  It is open to the<br \/>\nrespondents to formulate specific charges, under Rule 17(b) of the above said<br \/>\nrules and take appropriate disciplinary action against the petitioner, if the<br \/>\nrespondents desired to do so. With the above directions, the writ petition is<br \/>\nallowed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>RR<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The Registrar General cum<br \/>\n  The Principal Revenue Control Officer,<br \/>\n  Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The District Collector<br \/>\n  Karur District,  Karur.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The District Registrar,<br \/>\n  Karur District,  Karur.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The Sub Registrar<br \/>\n  Melakarur, Karur District.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The Tahsildar,<br \/>\n  Karur Taluk,  Karur.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01\/08\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR Writ Petition (MD)No.8039 of 2011 R.Karuppanan &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1.The Registrar General cum The Principal Revenue Control Officer, Chennai. 2.The District Collector Karur District, Karur. 3.The District [&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-95067","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>R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - 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-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-28T10:21:39+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=\"7 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-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-28T10:21:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1309,\"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\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\",\"name\":\"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-28T10:21:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@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.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - 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-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-28T10:21:39+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-28T10:21:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011"},"wordCount":1309,"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\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011","name":"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-28T10:21:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-karuppanan-vs-the-registrar-general-cum-on-1-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Karuppanan vs The Registrar General Cum on 1 August, 2011"}]},{"@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\/95067","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=95067"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/95067\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=95067"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=95067"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=95067"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}