Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
P.M.Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Secretary To Government, Department Of Animal Husbandry – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and procedural history of the dispute regarding leave sanctioning. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. summary of tribunal findings and the rival arguments regarding rule applicability. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. scope of high court's supervisory jurisdiction under article 227. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. determination on conduct and application of service rules to the disputed leave period. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
Muralee Krishna, J.
The applicant in T.A.No.5291 of 2012 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram (the ‘Tribunal’ for short) filed this original petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging Annexure A1 order dated 10.08.2018 passed by the Tribunal in that Transferred Application.
2. The petitioner, a Veterinary Surgeon previously working as Livestock Inspector in the Animal Husbandry Department, approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.20619 of 2011 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs;
“(i) to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P11 as unjust, illegal and unsustainable;
(ii) to issue a writ
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is limited to correcting manifest errors or perverse findings by lower tribunals; it cannot act as an appellate court, ....
The High Court affirmed the finality of the Tribunal's decision regarding leave recognition, emphasizing strict compliance by the Government with Tribunal's orders.
Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to correcting grave injustices and does not allow the High Court to substitute its judgment for that of lower tribunals.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not permit interference unless there is a gross error or violation of principles of natural justice in lower court or tribunal finding....
Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction limited; no interference absent perversity or injustice in tribunal orders on disciplinary punishments.
Judicial supervision under Article 227 cannot correct mere errors, only grave misconduct or failure to follow legal principles.
Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction limited to quashing Tribunal orders; substantive reliefs impermissible without explaining delay.
The court upheld that the High Court's supervisory role under Article 227 limits intervention to severe errors, while reaffirming settled matters should not be reopened.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited and does not permit interference unless there is gross violation of legal principles.
The period for passing departmental tests under Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules is calculated from the date of vacancy, not the order of promotion.
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
