Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K.Narendran, Muralee Krishna S.
Madhu S. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to tribunal's interim order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments about merits not considered. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. limits of supervisory jurisdiction. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. no grounds for interference with interim order. (Para 13) |
| 5. result of the petition. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
The applicants in O.A.(EKM)No.1085 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam, have filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging Ext.P2 interim order dated 15.07.2025 of the Tribunal in that original application, which was one filed by the petitioners-applicants, invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking an order to set aside Annexure A12 order dated 08.04.2025 issued by the 1st respondent State to the extent of declining the request to hold direct recruitment till the completion of promotion from the feeder category to the post of Secretary, Local Self Government Institutions, as found in Annexure A3 judgment dated 19.03.2018 of a Division Bench of this Court in O.P.(KAT)No.296 of 2014; a de
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not allow interference unless there is a manifest error or flagrant abuse of justice by the Administrative Tribunal.
The High Court upheld the Administrative Tribunal’s dismissal of a seniority challenge, affirming that tribunals operate within their jurisdiction unless manifest errors occur.
Pension eligibility is governed by prevailing conditions at the time of appointment, and service conditions may change. The court's supervisory jurisdiction does not allow review of all errors in tri....
The High Court under Article 227 exercises supervisory jurisdiction and cannot correct lower tribunal errors without clear evidence of fundamental principles of law being violated.
The supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 cannot extend to issuing certiorari concerning tribunal proceedings, emphasizing adherence to tribunal procedures.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited and does not extend to converting a tribunal's decision into an appeal; it can only intervene in cases of grave dereliction of d....
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 allows intervention only in cases of patent error or injustice, not for correcting all Tribunal errors.
Judicial review under Article 227 is limited; interference occurs only in cases of grave dereliction or patent perversity.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot overturn lower tribunal decisions unless there is manifest error or grave dereliction of duty.
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
