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) 31083

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
Kerala Private Iti Managers Association – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 16497 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N. Shobha, B.R. Muraleedharan
For the Respondents: Praveen K.S.

An administrative authority is legally obligated to consider and dispose of formal representations submitted by affected parties regarding the implementation of new systems within a reasonable time frame.

Headnote:The petitioners, representing private ITI managers, challenged the implementation of a new management system, citing lack of response to their formal representations. The court noted the grievance regarding inaction by authorities despite submitted representations and the need for administrative accountability. The central issue was whether the statutory authority was obligated to consider the representations submitted by the aggrieved parties. The court affirmed that administrative bodies are expected to process such representations in a time-bound manner to resolve grievances, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to the principles of natural justice without adjudicating on the merits of the policy itself. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representations within four weeks.

Table of Content
1. failure to address grievances through formal representations necessitates judicial intervention. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court mandates time-bound disposal of pending administrative representations. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

Petitioners are aggrieved by the proposed implementation of the National Instructor Management System and have raised their concerns through representations submitted to the second respondent. Despite submitting such representations, no action has been taken, nor have they responded. It is in such circumstances that the petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction to dispose of Exhibit-P7 and Exhibit-P8 representations in a time bound manner.

2. The limited relief sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit-P7 and Exhibit-P8 representations after granting an opportunity of being heard.

3. Though the learned Central Government Counsel sought time to obtain instructions, it is noticed that the writ petition, which was filed on 08.05.2026, came up for consideration on 12.05.2026, and it was adjourned to today, for obtaining instructions. Having regard to the nature of relief sought for, I am of the view that, even though instructions have not yet been obtained by the learned Central Government Counsel, the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction.

4. Accordingly, there will a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit-P7 and Exhibit-P8 representations submitted by the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within an outer period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of.

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