Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Geetha R, D/o Gangadharan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for retaining position. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. court proceedings and petitioner’s appeal. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. supervisory jurisdiction under article 227. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. petition dismissed but with a right to challenge. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner filed O.A.No.1446 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram, invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking an order to set aside Annexure A1 order dated 11.08.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent Director of Health Services; an order directing the respondents to retain her in the present station, i.e., Family Health Centre, Kadakampally, Thiruvananthapuram; or in the alternative to direct the respondents to accommodate her in the open vacancy at Integrated Health Centre, Pangappara, Thiruvananthapuram. The said original application filed by the petitioner-applicant, who is working as Assistant Surgeon at Primary Health Centre, Kadakampally, Thiruvananthapuram, was disposed of by Ext.P2 order dated 20.08.2025 of the Tribunal. Paragraphs 2, 3 and also the last paragraph of that
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 High Court under Article 227 exercises supervisory jurisdiction and cannot correct lower tribunal errors without clear evidence of fundamental principles of law being violated.
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'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.
Administrative transfers cannot be interfered with unless proved arbitrary or mala fide, upholding principles of administrative discretion.
The High Court maintains limited supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, primarily to address grave derelictions from subordinate tribunals and not to substitute its own decisions on administrati....
High Court permitted withdrawal of petition under Article 227 without prejudice due to drafting errors, allowing fresh filing.
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 allows intervention only in cases of patent error or injustice, not for correcting all Tribunal errors.
An original petition filed to seek interim relief from a tribunal becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed once the tribunal has already passed the necessary interim orders during the penden....
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
