Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K.Narendran, Muralee Krishna S.
Aiswarya.C – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Rep.By The Principal Secretary Department Of Health And Family Welfare, (Drugs Control Department) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners challenge notifications regarding appointments. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's analysis of tribunal's interim order. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. scope of high court's supervisory jurisdiction under article 227. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. original petition dismissed; no interference warranted. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioners are the applicants in O.A.(Ekm)No.1205 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam, which was one filed invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking an order to set aside Annexure A7 addendum notification dated 30.05.2025 issued by the 4th respondent Kerala Public Service Commission; a declaration that no reservation under the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, can be provided from Annexure A6 ranked list published by the 4th respondent Public Service Commission for category No.290/2021, since reservation under the provisions of the said Act was not notified in Annexure A2 notification dated 16.08.2021 issued by the Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Drug Inspector (Ayurveda); to
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 court reinforced the entitlement of differently-abled individuals to promotional reservations under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, mandating compliance with court judgments granting....
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....
High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 ensures that inferior courts and tribunals act within their authority to prevent injustices.
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 Tribunal violated natural justice by failing to hear both parties before passing its order, necessitating the High Court's intervention under Article 227.
Administrative transfers cannot be interfered with unless proved arbitrary or mala fide, upholding principles of administrative discretion.
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 allows intervention only in cases of patent error or injustice, not for correcting all Tribunal errors.
The High Court cannot interfere with the Tribunal's findings unless there is a manifest error or a grave breach of legal principles.
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
