SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ker) 393

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K. Narendran, Muralee Krishna S., JJ.
Aswathi S, D/O Rajan S., - Petitioner
Versus
Greeshma Pradeep, D/O Pradeep Kumar – Respondent
OP(KAT) NO. 477 OF 2024
Decided On : 18-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri.V.Varghese, Shri.Saju John
For the Respondent: Shri.S.Ramesh, Shri.Ajayan V.N., Smt. Princy Xavier, Sr. Gp; Sri. P. C. Sasidharan, Sc,

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 decisions.

Headnote:(A) Article 227 of the Constitution of India - Supervisory jurisdiction - Powers of High Court over tribunals - Court maintained that the High Court cannot sit in appeal over findings of lower courts, but can intervene where there has been a manifest error or injustice. (Paras 12-17)

(B) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Legal standing of notifications and rank lists issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission - The tribunal set aside an erratum notification that unilaterally changed candidates' rankings, ruling the action unfair and illegal, ensuring adherence to due process and natural justice. (Paras 5, 12-21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges the Kerala Administrative Tribunal's order setting aside a erratum notification which altered her rank in the selection process for Scientific Assistant (Biology) against an NCA vacancy, alleging breaches of both procedural fairness and legal rights.

Findings of Court:
The tribunal's ruling was upheld, confirming that the Commission's actions violated principles of fairness and were unsupported by due process, leading to an illegal alteration of the ranked list.

Issues: Key issues included examination of the validity of the Public Service Commission's erratum notification and the entitlement of competing candidates based on qualifications.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded the Tribunal acted within its jurisdiction, finding that procedural lapses denied the applicant just treatment, underlying the importance of fairness in administrative actions.

Result: The original petition is dismissed, upholding the Tribunal's decision.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under article 227 challenging erratum notification. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. procedural fairness demanded before altering ranked list. (Para 5 , 12 , 14)
3. contentions regarding the tribunal's decision and its legality. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. court upheld tribunal's ruling against unfair administrative actions. (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 21)

JUDGMENT :

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The 4th respondent in O.A.(EKM)No.1970 of 2021 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram, is before this Court in this original petition filed invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging Ext.P7 order dated 09.10.2024 of the Tribunal in that original application, which was one filed by the 1st respondent herein-applicant, invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , to set aside Annexure A11 erratum notification dated 09.11.2021 issued by the 1st respondent Kerala Public Service Commission (2nd respondent herein) and Annexure A12 consequential advice dated 23.11.2021 issued to the 4th respondent (petitioner herein) and Annexure A14 order of appointment dated 13.12.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent State Police Chief (4th respondent herein); an order directing the 1st respondent Kerala Public Service Commission (2nd respondent herein) to advice the applicant (1st respondent herein) as per Annexure A10 ranked list; and to direct the 3rd respondent State Police Chief (4th respondent herein) to effect appointment in accordance with the advice to be made by the Kerala Public Service Commission, on the basis of Annexure A10 ranked list.

2. The pleadings and materials on record would show that the applicant and the 4th respondent in O.A.(EKM)No.1970 of 2021 submitted applications pursuant to Annexure A1 notification dated 10.04.2019 issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission for recruitment to the post of Scientific Assistant (Biology) in the Kerala Police Service (Forensic Science Laboratory), against an NCA vacancy for Scheduled Caste community. The essential qualifications and the preferential qualification prescribed for the said post in Annexure A1 notification, which is in tune with Annexure A13 Special Rules for various technical posts in the Kerala State Forensic Science Laboratory, 2014, read thus;

“a) Essential Qualifications:-

Post Graduate Degree in Botany/Zoology with not less than 50% marks from a recognized University.

b) Preferential Qualification:-

(1) M.Phil Degree in Botany/Zoology from a recognized University.

(2) Two years Research/Analytical experience in Botany/Zoology from a recognized institution.”

3. After conducting an online examination, the Kerala Public Service Commission published Annexure A10 ranked list of the candidates for selection to the post of Scientific Assistant (Biology), in the Kerala Police Service (Forensic Science Laboratory), against NCA vacancy for Scheduled Caste community, in which the 1st respondent-applicant was rank No.1 and the 4th respondent-petitioner herein was rank No.2. Both of them secured 40.67 marks. The said ranked list was brought into force with effect from 24.09.2021. Two months thereafter, the Public Service Commission issued Annexure A11 erratum notification dated 09.11.2021, in which the 4th respondent (petitioner herein) is rank No.1 and the applicant (1st respondent herein) is rank No.2. The said notification reads thus;

“It is hereby notified that the following modifications has been made in the Ranked List No.338/2021/OLE dated 24.09.2021 for selection to the post of Scientific Assistant Biology-1 NCA-SC-Statewide (Cat.No.033/2019)-Kerala Police Service (Forensic Science Laboratory).

The entry “MPhil” in Remarks column, noted against the name of Greeshma Pradeep (Rank No.1) (Reg.No.100107) included in the above Ranked List is deleted from the Ranked List as she possesses only one preferential qualification.

The Rank position of Greeshma Pradeep with Rank No.1

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top