Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Sandip K.Luis – Appellant
Versus
Kerala Public Service Commission Represented By Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks inclusion in short list (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on qualifications and reliefs (Para 4 , 6 , 7 , 17) |
| 3. jurisdiction under article 227 analyzed (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 20) |
| 4. necessary parties in administrative applications (Para 14 , 19) |
| 5. dismissal of the original petition (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.468 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram, which was one filed invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking an order to set aside Annexure A4 short list published by the respondent Kerala Public Service Commission, containing the register number of candidates, who were found provisionally eligible to be called for interview, subject to verification of original documents, for selection to the post of Lecturer in Arts, History and Aesthetics in the Technical Education Department (College of Fine Arts), to the extent it does not include the register number of the applicant, as unjust, arbitrary and unsustainable; to direct the respondent Kerala Public Service Commission to issue erratum notificatio
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.
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.
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.
The court emphasized the importance of ensuring candidates' qualifications are fairly considered in recruitment matters, and affirmed the tribunal's duty to address constitutional challenges to rules....
Administrative Tribunals are competent to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of statutory rules and regulations, excluding their own parent statute. Consequently, such Tribunals must functio....
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 does not extend to appellate review; qualifications for civil service maintained under established rules.
The High Court cannot interfere with the Tribunal's findings unless there is a manifest error or a grave breach of legal principles.
Qualifications for public service posts must be obtained through regular study, not distance education, to satisfy statutory requirements.
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
