Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K. Narendran, Muralee Krishna S., JJ
Sumith S. Pillai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of original application and specific relief sought by petitioners. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 8) |
| 2. procedural history and the scope of tribunal's jurisdiction to adjudicate vires. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. tribunals established under article 323a possess inherent competence to test validity of statutory provisions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. setting aside erroneous dismissal and directing tribunal to hear the case on merits. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
1.The petitioners are the applicants in O.A.(EKM)No.613 of 2025 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, (Additional Bench, Ernakulam), an original application filed under Section 19 of the Kerala Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) Declare that the non-feasance on the part of the respondents to consider the qualification of Postgraduate Diploma in Manasik Swasthya Vigyan (Ayurveda) (Diploma in Psychiatry) for appointment to the post of Medical Officer (Manasik) as notified in Annexure A1 is arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law and unconstitutional;
(ii) Declare that the non-inclusion of qualification of the Postgraduate Diploma in
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
