Interference under Article 227 requires clear evidence of grave dereliction, not merely disagreements with Tribunal decisions.

Muralee Krishna S., J.

The applicant in O.A.(EKM)No.267 of 2026 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam (‘the Tribunal’ for short), filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging Ext.P6 order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the Tribunal in that original application.

2. The petitioner, who is the Senior Superintendent in the Department of Agricultural Development and Farmers’ Welfare, Government of Kerala, was appointed as a Liaison officer in the office of the Advocate General, Ernakulam, as per the order dated 25.09.2025 on a deputation basis. He has been serving in the said post since 13.10.2025. By Annexure A1 Government Order dated 23.03.2019, the Government sanctioned one post of Liaison Assistant for assisting the Liaison Officer by transferring the post of clerk from the Assistant Director of Agricultural Office, Vyttila, to the Principal Agricultural Office, Ernakulam. The 5^th respondent, who is a Junior Superintendent, was initially transferred to the post of Liaison Assistant on a special service arrangement for a period of three months, vide order dated 15.03.2025. This arrangement was subsequently extended, vide Annexure A2 order dated 12.12.2025. On 19.02.2026, the 2^nd respondent, by Annexure A3 order, transferred the petitioner from the post of Liaison Officer and posted him to the Principal Agricultural Office, Ernakulam. In his place, the 5^th respondent has been appointed as the Liaison Officer. Aggrieved by the transfer, the petitioner submitted Annexure A4 representation dated 19.02.2026 before the 2^nd respondent, raising various contentions. Thereafter, he approached the Tribunal by filing the original application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking the following reliefs:

“i. Set aside Annexure A3 order issued by the 2^nd respondent to the extent it transfers the Applicant from the post of Liaison Officer and appoints the 5^th Respondent to the said post.

ii. Direct the 2^nd Respondent to consider and pass a reasoned and speaking order on the representation submitted by the Applicant, marked as Annexure A4, in accordance with law, within a time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Tribunal.

iii.Declare that the appointment of the 5thRespondent, a Junior Superintendent, to the post of Liaison Officer is illegal and contrary to the service rules.”

3. On 24.02.2026, when the original application came up for consideration, the Tribunal disposed of the same with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider Annexure A4 representation and pass orders on the same within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is now before this Court with the present original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article

227 of the Constitution of India .

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the contentions in the original application, which the petitioner repeated in the original petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel that there is no post of Senior Superintendent in the Principal Agricultural Office, Ernakulam, to accommodate the petitioner.

6. On the other hand, the learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the petitioner had approached the Tribunal as well as this Court by suppressing material facts, and even he had obtained information by filing an