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 :
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 Annexure A8 judgment
The Tribunal violated natural justice by failing to hear both parties before passing its order, necessitating the High Court's intervention under Article 227.
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 ....
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.
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot alter findings of lower tribunals without clear manifest errors, particularly regarding vacancy reporting tied to expired lists.
The High Court upheld the Administrative Tribunal’s dismissal of a seniority challenge, affirming that tribunals operate within their jurisdiction unless manifest errors occur.
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not permit the High Court to interfere unless there is a manifest error, breach of legal principles, or failure of justice in the tribunal's decisi....
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited and does not permit interference unless there is gross violation of legal principles.
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not allow High Courts to intervene in lower tribunals' orders unless there is manifest error or a violation of fundamental principles of law.
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
