Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 47486
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Viju Abraham, J
Remya Reveendran – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 25179 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Alexander Joseph, Akhilasree Bhaskaran, Antony Nikhil Remelo, Ajith Sunny
For the Respondents: R.S.Lakshman, G. Biju
The court directed the administrative authority to decide on a pending seniority dispute application within a fixed timeline of three months, ensuring a fair hearing for all concerned parties.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged the seniority position granted to certain employees which allegedly overlooked her superior claim, leading to the filing of an application (Ext.P9) before the Board. The court addressed the request for the expeditious disposal of the said application. The core issue is whether the pending application regarding seniority claims should be decided within a specific timeframe. The court reasoned that given the limited nature of the request, the appropriate remedy is to direct the administrative authority to resolve the dispute after hearing all affected parties. Above writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 6th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 application preferred by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, respondents 7 to 9 and any other affected parties, within an outer limit of three months.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to seniority positioning of employees. (Para 1) |
| 2. direction for time-bound disposal of administrative applications. (Para 2) |
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2026
Aggrieved by the seniority position granted to employees including respondents 7, 8 and 9 overlooking the superior claim of the petitioner, she has preferred Ext.P9 application before the 6th respondent Board. Petitioner seeks for an expeditious disposal of the same.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent Board.
Taking into consideration the limited request made by the petitioner, above writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 6th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 application preferred by the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, respondents 7 to 9 and any other affected parties. A decision in this regard shall be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
