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) 11978

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. NAGARESH, J
GENERAL MANAGER, FR JAYAN PAYYAPPILLY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 24473 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.A.FAYAZ, SMT.M.VISHNUPRIYA, SMT.C.B.ABHINAVA
For the Respondents: SMT.V.A.HARITHA

The court upholds entitlement to appointment benefits based on age relaxation due to pandemic provisions, emphasizing governmental commitments.

Headnote:The judgment addresses the reliefs sought by the petitioners including the approval of appointment and age relaxation under Covid 19 provisions. The court finds no impediments for granting approval in light of existing orders and substantially favors the petitioners. The main issue concerned age relaxation benefits for the petitioners in education, and the court emphasizes the necessity to uphold governmental provisions during the pandemic, thus leading to their decision.

Result: The petition is disposed of as the respondents have granted relief.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek relief on appointment approval. (Para 1)
2. court finds no impediments in granting substantial relief. (Para 2)

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of February, 2026 The 1st petitioner is the Manager and the 2nd petitioner is an UPST working in St.Albert's High School, Ernakulam. The writ petition was filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) To call for the records leading to Exts.P4, Ext.P5, P10 and P12 orders of respondents 4, 3 and 1 and set aside the same by issuing a writ of certiorari.

ii) To issue a Writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to approve the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as UPST w.e.f. 01.10.2021 onwards on scale of pay.

iii) To declare that since 2nd petitioner's appointment w.e.f 01.10.20-21 was in the academic year 2021- 2022 and she had not crossed the age of 43 years as on 01.01.2021 is entitled to get the benefit of upper age relaxation given by the Government vide Ext.P2 in view of the Covid 19 Pandemic.

iv) To declare that in view of Ext.P7 order of accepting the resignation of Remya John Exts.P8, P9 and P13 orders evidencing steps taken to fill up the disabled quota, and the approval given to senior appointees under the management there are no impediments in the grant of approval to the 2nd petitioner as UPST w.e.f. 01.10.2021.

v) To issue Writ of Mandamus directing the 4th respondent to approve the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as UPST provisionally w.e.f. 01.10.2021 onwards with all consequential benefits.”

2. When this writ petition came up for hearing today, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that pending disposal of the writ petition, the District Educational Officer has passed Ext.P15 order dated 07.12.2025, granting substantial relief to the petitioners and therefore, the petitioners do not want to prosecute the writ petition.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of recording Ext.P15 order dated 07.12.2025 of the District Educational Officer.

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