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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 2427

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
ASHLY S KRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 1023 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.DIPU.R, SRI.K.S.BAIJU, SMT. DEVI KRIPA R., SMT.P.V.SARITHA VENUGOPAL, SMT.DHANYA BABU, SMT.NEETHU SASI, SMT.ANSU SARA MATHEW
For the Respondents: SMT. V.A. HARITHA

Administrative delay in appointment approval may violate a petitioner's right to timely salary disbursement.

Headnote:The court analyzed the non-approval of the petitioner's appointment as HSST by the authorities and found the delay unjustifiable. The action contravened the rights of the petitioner to receive salary. The court directed the Regional Deputy Director to take a decision on the approval of the appointment within two months. The ratio decidendi centered around the timeliness of administrative actions.

Table of Content
1. administrative responsibilities regarding appointment approval. (Para 1 , 2)
2. right to salary upon appointment approval. (Para 3)

J U D G M E N T

The 5th respondent as Manager of Malayattil Kesavan Nair Memorial Higher Secondary School appointed the petitioner as HSST English, in the school, as per Ext.P1 in a permanent post which arouse due to the promotion of one HSST as Principal.

2. Subsequently, the 5th respondent has submitted Ext.P2 before the 3rd respondent for the approval of the appointment effected by Ext.P1. As on date, the 3rd respondent has not acted upon Ext.P2, and hence now the petitioner is denied salary. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3. Notice to respondents 4 and 5 is dispensed with in view of the natue of the reliefs to be granted in this writ petition.

4. The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-

consideration of Ext.P2. Ext.P2 has been sent by the Manager of the School to the Regional Deputy Director for approving the appointment of the petitioner in the post of HSST. The petitioner submits that in view of non approval of the appointment, the petitioner is not paid salary in the approved scale. As the proposal is made on 03.10.2024, if the same is not considered so far, a decision thereon shall be taken within a reasonable time.

Writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P2 and take appropriate decision thereon, if no decision is taken so far, within a period of two months. If the petitioner is holding lean to the lower post, the petitioner shall be paid salary appliable to the lower post until a decision is taken on Ext.P2.

Sd/-

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