Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Vijayalakshmi C.G., W/o. Sanish T.B. – Appellant
Versus
Sumitha R.T., W/o. Vinod Kumar Kattumunda – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. government and academic eligibility criteria for assistant professor (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural arguments related to tribunal hearings (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. violation of natural justice by tribunal procedures (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. grounds for high court's intervention under article 227 (Para 11) |
| 5. ruling to annul tribunal's orders due to legal inconsistencies (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
Respondents 5 and 6 in O.A.(EKM)No.605 of 2024 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam, are before this Court in this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to set aside Ext.P11 order dated 16.07.2025 of the Tribunal in that original application, which was one filed by respondents 1 to 13 herein-applicants, invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking an order to set aside Annexure A6 Government order dated 06.07.2023, in view of the fact that, Annexure A7 order dated 03.03.2015 of the University of Calicut, based on which Annexure A6 order was issued, has already been quashed by this Court in
The Tribunal violated natural justice by failing to hear both parties before passing its order, necessitating the High Court's intervention under Article 227.
High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 ensures that inferior courts and tribunals act within their authority to prevent injustices.
The High Court maintains its supervisory role under Article 227, intervening only in cases of manifest errors or injustice by lower tribunals, emphasizing procedural fairness in administrative decisi....
Procedural fairness mandates that all affected parties must be notified and heard before any administrative decision is made, in line with natural justice principles.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot replace the tribunal's findings unless there is manifest error or injustice.
The supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is limited to ensuring lower courts act within jurisdiction, without intervening unless there is a manifest error ....
The High Court cannot interfere with the Tribunal's findings under Article 227 unless there is clear evidence of patent perversity or gross failure of justice.
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.
The supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 cannot extend to issuing certiorari concerning tribunal proceedings, emphasizing adherence to tribunal procedures.
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
