The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 allows for interference only in cases of manifest error or grave injustice.

JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

The applicant in O.A.No.338 of 2020 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam (the ‘Tribunal’, in short), filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging Ext.P4 order dated 19.05.2025 passed by the Tribunal in that original application.

2. Going by the averments in the original application, the petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer in Kannada on UGC Scale in Collegiate Education Department (Category No. 581/2012) as per the notification issued by the 3^rd respondent, and after written test and interview, the 3^rd respondent issued Annexure A1 rank list which came into effect as on 17.03.2017 and currency of rank list came to an end on 16.03.2020. In Annexure A1 rank list, the name of the petitioner stood as No.1 in the supplementary list as under the quota Ezhava/Thiyya/Billava. To date, nobody has got advice from that list. As per the reservation, the next appointment is to be from the Ezhava quota, and hence the petitioner has to get the advice from the 3^rd respondent. But, the 3^rd respondent has issued an appointment chart and advice given on 23.01.2020 for the PWD/low vision, but due to the non-availability of the candidate, the post is not filled. In the quota of reservation, the petitioner has to get the advice. Though the petitioner has made Annexure A4 representation dated 03.02.2020 to the 3^rd respondent, there was no response. With these pleadings, the petitioner-applicant filed the original application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue appropriate direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to report the vacancy of Lecturer in Kannada on UGC Scale in the Kerala Collegiate Education Department post to be filled up on the basis of Annexure A1 rank list before the 3^rd respondent.

(ii) Issue appropriate direction to the 3^rd respondent to issue advice memo to the applicant to the post of Lecturer in Kannada on UGC Scale in Kerala Collegiate Education Department post as reported by 1^st and 2^nd respondents. (ii)(a) Issue appropriate order or direction directing the 3^rd respondent to issue advice memo to the applicant to the post of Lecturer in Kannada on UGC scale in the Kerala Collegiate Education Department to the one vacancy reported on 17.01.2020 by the respondents 1 and 2 from the Annexure A1 rank list which came into effect from 14.03.2017”.

3. In the original application, on behalf of the 3^rd respondent, a reply statement dated 29.05.2020 was filed by the learned Standing Counsel. To that reply statement, the petitioner filed a rejoinder dated 20.06.2020. After hearing both sides and on appreciation of materials on record, the Tribunal, by the impugned Ext.P4 order dated 19.05.2025, dismissed the original application. Paragraph 7 of that order reads thus:

“7. The applicant’s claim is against the vacancy which has since been filled up based on the advice from the subsequent ranked list. There is no interim order protecting or preserving the claim or contention raised by the applicant notwithstanding the publication of the subsequent ranked list. In the present circumstances, when the only vacancy which the applicant claims is filled up and the ranked list in which the applicant was included, has already expired in the year 2021, no relief can be granted to the applicant.

Hence the Original Application is dismissed.”

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Public Service