STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT vs DR. ACHAMMA ALEX AGED 60 YEARS W/O. MATHEW T. THOMAS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT – Appellant
Versus
DR. ACHAMMA ALEX AGED 60 YEARS W/O. MATHEW T. THOMAS – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE, SRI.BIJO THOMAS GEORGE, SHRI.P.A.REJIMON, SMT.NIKITA NAIR C.S., SHRI.VIVEKJOS PUTHUKULANGARA, SMT.MAHIMA MERINE REJI
For the Respondents: SRI. BENNY GERVACIS, SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY, SRI. THOMAS ABRAHAM

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the scope of UGC Regulations 2018 precedence over conflicting State Government Orders regarding post-tenure designation and pay fixation for Principals and Professors?

What is the effect of Government Orders Ext.P4 and Ext.P6 on the designation and pay of a Principal upon completion of tenure as Principal, and can UGC Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) prevail over them?

What are the constitutional implications of federal supremacy in this case, and does UGC Regulation 2018 override State laws and orders in determining standards and appointments in higher education?

Table of Content
1. details of the petitioner’s service history. (Para 3)
2. arguments regarding applicability of ugc regulations. (Para 4 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. court's decision to uphold petitioner's claims. (Para 8 , 18)
4. legal interpretation of ugc regulations precedence. (Para 14 , 15 , 17)

JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna S., J.

The point that arises for consideration in this writ appeal is whether there is any illegality in the finding of the learned Single Judge that Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) of the UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualification for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standard in Higher Education, 2018, (‘ UGC Regulations 2018 ’ for short) will prevail over the conflicting provisions in Exts.P4 and P6 Government Orders dated 29.06.2019 and 29.09.2019, bearing G.O.(P) No.18/2019/HEdn and G.O.(P) No.28/2019/HEdn, respectively?

2. This writ appeal has been filed by respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.(C)No.9523 of 2024, under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958, challenging the judgment dated 21.06.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition. For convenience of reference, the pa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJSTATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT – AppellantVersusDR. ACHAMMA ALEX AGED 60 YEARS W/O. MATHEW T. THOMAS – Respondent

What is the scope of UGC Regulations 2018 precedence over conflicting State Government Orders regarding post-tenure designation and pay fixation for Principals and Professors?

What is the effect of Government Orders Ext.P4 and Ext.P6 on the designation and pay of a Principal upon completion of tenure as Principal, and can UGC Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) prevail over them?

What are the constitutional implications of federal supremacy in this case, and does UGC Regulation 2018 override State laws and orders in determining standards and appointments in higher education?

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT – Appellant
Versus
DR. ACHAMMA ALEX AGED 60 YEARS W/O. MATHEW T. THOMAS – Respondent