Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.TH, JJ
Thara S.S., W/o Ajith Kumar G. – Appellant
Versus
University Of Calicut – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts about review petition and case background. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners claim errors in prior judgments. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court examines procedural issues and legal grounds. (Para 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. definitions and criteria for review of judgments. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. insights into the nature of reservation procedures. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. conclusion on the validity of review petition. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
ORDER :
The petitioners in these review petitions are third parties to W.A.No.1527 of 2021, who have filed the respective review petitions under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’ for short), seeking review of the judgment dated 03.02.2023 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in that writ appeal.
3. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, taking the view that since the vacancy corresponding to roster point 54 has been filled up by appointing a candidate belonging to ETB communities, though not in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, there is no illegality in the appointments effected. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant/writ petitioner filed W.A. No
The review jurisdiction is not meant for rearguing the merits of the case but is limited to instances where an error is apparent on the face of the record.
The court ruled that the University violated reservation principles by creating additional roster points for disabled candidates, necessitating a rework of the selection process without affecting exi....
The court ruled that review petitions do not permit a re-examination of previously decided issues unless there is an error apparent on record, reinforcing the limited scope of review under civil proc....
Point of law: The proper and correct course is to first fill up the OC quota (50%) on the basis of merit; then fill up each of the social reservation quotas i.e. SC, ST and BC; the third step would b....
Rule 17A indicates that under this Rule special recruitment can be done from among Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes when they are not adequately represented in any service, class, category or gra....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reservation for PWD candidates is horizontal and candidates must be appointed against vacancies exclusively earmarked for them.
Court upheld the prerogative of the appropriate government in reserving posts for disabled candidates as per the Act, asserting that judicial intervention in recruitment processes must be limited and....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
