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) 25972

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
C KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
OP(KAT) NO. 136 OF 2026 | OA NO.2297 OF 2013



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C. KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR(PARTY-IN-PERSON)

Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction limited to quashing Tribunal orders; substantive reliefs impermissible without explaining delay.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged the Kerala Administrative Tribunal's dismissal of an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking regularization of 208 days leave without allowance (1990-92) as medical leave, revision of pension, and quashing of rejection order. Tribunal dismissed the claim as stale due to delay, laches, and acquiescence. Court found the reliefs sought exceeded supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. Issues framed involved scope of Article 227 jurisdiction and unexplained delay in challenging Tribunal's order dated 23.01.2014. Ratio: Reliefs beyond quashing impugned order and allowing original application not permissible; no explanation for delay offered, rendering petition not maintainable. Original petition dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to file fresh petition with proper pleadings and reliefs.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges tribunal dismissal of medical leave claim. (Para 1 , 2)

The petitioner, who is the applicant in O.A.No.2297 of 2013 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram, has filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India , challenging Ext.P1 order dated 23.01.2014 of the Tribunal in that original application, which was one filed invoking the provisions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking an order directing the respondents to sanction 208 days leave availed by the applicant for treatment, as leave without allowance on medical ground; to quash Annexure A6 order dated 26.07.2012 issued by the 1st respondent State declining the request of the applicant to sanction leave without allowance on medical ground; and an order to revise the pension and service benefits sanctioned to the applicant, reckoning the period of leave as leave without allowance on medical ground.

2. The Tribunal, by Ext.P1 order dated 23.01.2014, dismissed O.A.No.2297 of 2013 on a finding that the claim of the applicant is highly stale and he is guilty of delay, laches and acquiescence. In the result, the original application was dismissed as not maintainable. 3. In this original petition filed on 17.02.2026, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of theConstitution of India, the petitioner-applicant is seeking an order to treat the leave without allowance taken by the petitioner during the year 1990-92 for 208 days as leave without allowance on medical ground, as done in the case of Smt.P.J. Mary, Supervisor, Social Welfare Department, vide Annexure A4 Government order dated 10.09.2002. Other consequential reliefs are also sought for in this original petition. 4. The reliefs sought for in this original petition are beyond the scope of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of theConstitution of India. In an original petition filed under Article 227 of the , the relief that could be sought for by the applicant in an original application filed before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, is an order to quash the impugned order of the Tribunal and to allow that original application as prayed for. We also notice that no explanation whatsoever is offered in the original petition explaining the delay in challenging the order dated 23.01.2014 of the Tribunal.

5. The petitioner, who appeared in person, would submit that he may be permitted to withdraw this original petition, without prejudice to his right to file a fresh original petition challenging the order dated 23.01.2014 of the Tribunal in O.A.No.2297 of 2013, with appropriate pleadings and reliefs.

Based on the aforesaid submission made by the petitioner, who appeared in person, this original petition is dismissed as withdrawn, without prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner.

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