Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.TH, JJ
P.E.AZEEZ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging tribunal's order under article 227 (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner’s service history and claims (Para 2) |
| 3. petitioner seeks promotions based on seniority (Para 3) |
| 4. court directive on promotion review (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 5. scope of superintendence under article 227 (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. petitioner's claim considered stale (Para 14) |
| 7. limitation period for original applications (Para 15) |
| 8. final dismissal of the original petition (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna, J.
The applicant in O.A.No.2248 of 2021 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram (the ‘Tribunal’, in short), filed this original petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging the order dated 06.06.2024 passed by the Tribunal in that original application.
2. Going by the averments in the original application, the petitioner entered into service as a Copyist in the Revenue Department as per the advice of the Kerala Public Service Commission on 20.10.1970. He retired from the post of Tahsildar upon attainment of the age of superannuation. Although from 01.07.1968 onwards, the salary of copyist
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
