Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
GIREESH.K – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. proposal for re-designation of posts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the petitioners argue the denial is arbitrary. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. court's respect for high-level decisions. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. high court's decisions supersede executive opinions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. remand for reconsideration of re-designation. (Para 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT
The constitutional propriety in issuing Ext.P4 reply by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Kerala declining to approve the proposal for re-designation of the posts of Court Keeper and Court Keeper (Higher Grade) under the Kerala High Court service, as Junior Court Amenities Assistant and Senior Court Amenities Assistant respectively, is the issue arising for consideration in the writ petition.
2. Writ petitioners are members of the Kerala High Court Service, working as Court Keepers (Higher Grade) and Court Keepers. The duties and responsibilities of Court Keepers are similar to that Amenities Assistants in the Legislature Department, contend the petitioners. The petitioners therefore submitted Ext.P2 representation dated 31.03.2021 to the High Court of Kerala requesting to re- designate the posts of Court Keeper as Juni
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
