Procedural fairness mandates that all affected parties must be notified and heard before any administrative decision is made, in line with natural justice principles.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

Additional respondents 5 to 9 in O.A.No.1254 of 2022 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench at Thiruvananthapuram, are before this Court in this original petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , seeking an order to set aside Ext.P7 order dated 19.12.2025 of the Tribunal in O.A.No.1254 of 2022 and also Ext.P8 order dated 19.12.2025 in M.A.No.2228 of 2025 in that original application, which was one filed by the 1^st respondent herein-applicant, who is a Range Forest Officer in the Kerala Forest Department, who entered service pursuant to the process for direct recruitment by the Kerala Public Service Commission, pursuant to which Annexure A1 ranked list with category No.293/2011 was published by the Public Service Commission, which came into force with effect from 19.03.2012. In O.A.No.1254 of 2022, which was one filed invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , the applicant sought for an order to quash Annexure A16 communication dated 23.09.2021 and Annexure A18 communication dated 17.05.2022 issued by the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Administration), Annexure A17 Government letter dated 12.07.2021 and Annexure A19 letter dated 20.06.2022 of the Director of State Forest Training Centre; a declaration that the applicant is entitled to get seniority in service as Range Forest Officer, by fixing his seniority notionally, with retrospective effect from 31.03.2012, the date of advice of Sri. Mohammed Raphy K.M., rank No.8A in Annexure A1 ranked list, and as modified by Annexure A3 erratum notification dated 21.12.2013 issued by the Public Service Commission, who was advised against the turn of the applicant from Annexure A1 ranked list and that, the applicant is entitled to get the benefit of service conditions those were in vogue at that time, and consequently, direct the respondents therein to take necessary steps granting the applicant all such benefits, including the benefit of statutory pension; and direct the Kerala Public Service Commission to intimate respondents 1 to 3 therein regarding the advice position of the applicant, if he was advised at the right time on 31.03.2012, by including his name as rank No.8A in Annexure A1 ranked list.

2. O.A.No.1254 of 2022 was originally allowed by Ext.P4 order dated 16.01.2025 of the Tribunal, whereby Annexures A16 to A19 were set aside and the 1^st respondent State was directed to consider the claim of the applicant for notional seniority above Sri.Mohammed Raphy K.M., in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Balwant Singh Narwal v. State of Haryana [ (2008) 7 SCC 728 ], Jayachandran C. v. State of Kerala [(2020) 5 SCC 230], Sanjay Dhar v. J&K Public Service Commission [(2000) 8 SCC 182] and Lakshmana Rao Yadavalli v. State of Andra Pradesh [(2014) 13 SCC 393] after affording him an opportunity of hearing. The applicant was directed to submit a fresh representation raising all the grievances before the 1^st respondent State, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, and the 1^st respondent State shall pass orders on the same, within a period of two months from the date of its receipt, if necessary, after hearing Sri. Muhammed Raphy K.M., also. The Tribunal ordered that the applicant shall not be compelled to get enrolled in National Pension Scheme, in the meanwhile.

3. Seeking review of Ext.P4 order dated 16.01.2025 in O.A.No.1254 of 2022, the petitioners herein filed R.A.No.17 of 2025, invo