Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Aswathi S, D/O Rajan S. – Appellant
Versus
Greeshma Pradeep, D/O Pradeep Kumar – Respondent
| 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 issu
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 High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot replace the tribunal's findings unless there is manifest error or injustice.
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 under Article 227 cannot alter findings of lower tribunals without clear manifest errors, particularly regarding vacancy reporting tied to expired lists.
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 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 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.
Differently abled candidates are entitled to reservation benefits if a post is identified after the initial notification and within the currency of the selection list, adhering to statutory provision....
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....
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
