Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, SYAM KUMAR V.M., JJ
ATHUL ANTONY A. – Appellant
Versus
HIGH COURT OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. invalidating the minimum marks criterion requires prior knowledge. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. the court upheld the procedural validity of minimum cutoff marks. (Para 4 , 7 , 10) |
| 3. challenging the notification's terms post-participation lacks legal ground. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. statutory guidelines supersede executive orders in recruitment. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2026
Syam Kumar V.M., J.
This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 06.02.2024 of the learned Single Judge dismissing WP (C) No. 21048 of 2022 filed by the appellant. Respondents were the respondents in the said W.P.(C).
2. Appellant who is a person with disability as defined under Section 2 (s) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act , 2016 had filed the W.P.(C), inter alia seeking to quash Exhibit P3 notification issued by the 2nd respondent to the extent it prescribed 35% as the minimum marks for qualifying the interview and to be included in Exhibit P12 ranked list and a declaration that the appellant is fully eligible to be included in Exhibit P12 ranked list, at the appropriate rank to be assigned on the basis of the combined marks in the written test and the intervi
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
