Sunitha P vs State Of Kerala on 6 March, 2026

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sunitha P vs State Of Kerala on 6 March, 2026

The applicants in O.A.(EKM)No.245 of 2026 are before this Court in this original petition filed invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order directing the 3rd respondent Kerala Public Service Commission to provisionally widen the probability list drawn pursuant to Annexure A1 notification dated 31.12.2019 issued inviting applications for the post of Field Worker in the Health Services Department (Category No.546/2019), without prescribing any cut-off marks, so as to ensure that no notified vacancy is remained unfilled on account of premature exhaustion of the ranked list. The interim relief sought for in this original petition, i.e., O.P.(KAT)No.78 of 2026, is an order to stay all further advice, appointment and consequential actions pursuant to the probability list published under Annexure A6 series and final ranked list published under Annexure A7 series and Ext.P3 ranked list, pending disposal of this original petition.

2. The petitioners-applicants, who are candidates for the post of Field Worker in the Health Services Department, pursuant to Annexure A1 notification dated 31.12.2019 issued by the OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:20551 Kerala Public Service Commission, filed O.A.(EKM)No.245 of 2026 before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam, invoking the provisions under Section 19(1) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs and interim reliefs:

"(i) To declare that the fixation and application of cut-off marks by the 3rd respondent Commission at the stage of preparation of the Probability Lists for the post of field worker is illegal, arbitrary, and unsustainable in law, being dehors the notification and the governing rules;

(ii) To quash Annexure A6 to Annexure A6(b) probability lists prepared for the post of field worker in so far as they are based on unauthorised cut-off marks and have the effect of illegally excluding otherwise eligible and meritorious candidates, including the Applicants;

(iii) To quash Annexure A7 and Annexure A7(a) final ranked lists published for the post of field worker in Kasaragod district with effect from 19.01.2026 and in Pathanamthitta district with effect from 30.01.2026, being consequentially vitiated as having been prepared solely from the illegal and arbitrary probability lists under Annexure A6 and Annexure A6(b);

(iv) To direct the 3rd respondent Commission to prepare fresh probability lists for the post of field worker by widening the list, without prescribing or applying any cut-off marks.

(v) To direct the 3rd respondent Commission to publish revised and widened probability lists and thereafter prepare fresh final ranked lists for the concerned districts after granting due consideration to the applicants, in accordance with law;

(vi) To declare that the applicants are entitled to be considered for inclusion in the widened probability lists and the OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:20551 consequential final Ranked lists for the post of field worker; Interim Relief:-

(i) Stay all further advice, appointment, or issuance of appointment orders to the post of field worker pursuant to the Annexure A7 and Annexure A7(a) final ranked lists published for Kasaragod and Pathanamthitta districts, respectively;

(ii) Restrain the 3rd respondent Commission from publishing or giving effect to any final ranked lists for the post of field worker in Thrissur district, based on Annexure A6(a) Probability List published for Thrissur district, during the pendency of this original application."

3. Though the original application was presented before the Tribunal on 09.02.2026, after curing the defects noted by the Registry of the Tribunal, the same was taken on file on 16.02.2026. As evident from Ext.P2 case status, the original application came up for admission before the Tribunal on 17.02.2026. On that date, the Tribunal directed the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission to ensure that reply statement is filed against the contentions of the applicants, and the original application was posted after three weeks.

4. We heard arguments of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners-applicants, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission for respondents 3 OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:20551 to 7.

5. During the course of arguments, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners-applicant and also the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission addressed arguments touching the merits of the matter now pending before the Tribunal in O.A.(EKM)No.245 of 2026. The learned Senior Government Pleader adopted the arguments advanced by the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission. The learned Senior Government Pleader and also the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission raised a question as to the maintainability of this original petition, pointing out the limitations of the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, in a case in which the Tribunal, on the first posting date, has ordered the matter to be listed after three weeks for filing reply statement by the Public Service Commission.

6. Article 227 of the Constitution of India deals with the power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court. Under clause (1) of Article 227 of the Constitution, every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:20551 jurisdiction.

7. In Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil [(2010) 8 SCC 329] the Apex Court, while analysing the scope and ambit of the power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, held that the object of superintendence, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. The power of interference under Article 227 is to be kept to the minimum to ensure that the wheel of justice does not come to a halt and the fountain of justice remains pure and unpolluted in order to maintain public confidence in the functioning of the tribunals and courts subordinate to the High Court.

8. In Jai Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [(2010) 9 SCC 385], while considering the nature and scope of the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Apex Court held that, undoubtedly the High Court, under Article 227 of the Constitution, has the jurisdiction to ensure that all subordinate courts, as well as statutory or quasi-judicial tribunals exercise the powers vested in them, within the bounds of their authority. The High Court has the power and the jurisdiction to OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 8 2026:KER:20551 ensure that they act in accordance with the well established principles of law. The exercise of jurisdiction must be within the well recognised constraints. It cannot be exercised like a 'bull in a china shop', to correct all errors of the judgment of a court or tribunal, acting within the limits of its jurisdiction. This correctional jurisdiction can be exercised in cases where orders have been passed in grave dereliction of duty or in flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or justice.

9. In K.V.S. Ram v. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation [(2015) 12 SCC 39] the Apex Court held that, in exercise of the power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court can interfere with the order of the court or tribunal only when there has been a patent perversity in the orders of the tribunal and courts subordinate to it or where there has been gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural justice have been flouted.

10. In Sobhana Nair K.N. v. Shaji S.G. Nair [2016 (1) KHC 1] a Division Bench of this Court held that, the law is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Apex Court that in proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 9 2026:KER:20551 Court cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by the lower court or tribunal and the jurisdiction of this Court is only supervisory in nature and not that of an appellate court. Therefore, no interference under Article 227 of the Constitution is called for, unless this Court finds that the lower court or tribunal has committed manifest error, or the reasoning is palpably perverse or patently unreasonable, or the decision of the lower court or tribunal is in direct conflict with settled principles of law.

11. In view of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, the High Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by a lower court or tribunal. The supervisory jurisdiction cannot be exercised to correct all errors of the order or judgment of a lower court or tribunal, acting within the limits of its jurisdiction. The correctional jurisdiction under Article 227 can be exercised only in a case where the order or judgment of a lower court or tribunal has been passed in grave dereliction of duty or in flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or justice. Therefore, no interference under Article 227 is called for, unless the High Court finds that the OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 10 2026:KER:20551 lower court or tribunal has committed manifest error, or the reasoning is palpably perverse or patently unreasonable, or the decision of the lower court or tribunal is in direct conflict with settled principles of law or where there has been gross and manifest failure of justice or the basic principles of natural justice have been flouted.

12. In the instant case, as already noticed hereinbefore, the original application filed by the petitioners-applicants was listed before the Tribunal for admission, for the first time, only on 17.02.2026. On that date, when the original application came up for admission, the Tribunal ordered the matter to be listed after three weeks, with a direction to the learned Standing Counsel for Kerala Public Service Commission to ensure that reply statement is filed against the contentions of the applicants.

13. The interim reliefs sought for in O.A.(EKM)No.245 of 2026 is an order of stay of all further advice, appointment or issuance of appointment orders to the post of Field Worker in the Health Services Department, pursuant to Annexures A7 and A7(a) final ranked list published for Kasaragode and Pathanamthitta districts respectively; and an order to restrain the Kerala Public Service Commission from publishing or giving OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 11 2026:KER:20551 effect to any final ranked list for the post of Field Worker in Health Services Department, in Thrissur district, based on Annexure A6 probability list, during the pendency of the original application.

14. In view of the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, the object of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. The correctional jurisdiction can be exercised when there is grave dereliction of duty on the part of the Tribunal or flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or justice. Considering the nature of the interim reliefs sought for in O.A.(EKM)No.245 of 2026, the petitioners-applicants cannot invoke the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, when the Tribunal, on the first posting date, has ordered the matter to be listed after three weeks for filing reply statement by the SPublic Service Commission.

In the result, this original petition fails on the ground of maintainability and the same is accordingly dismissed; however, OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 12 2026:KER:20551 leaving open the legal and factual contentions raised by both sides.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

                             MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE
nak
 OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026              13                   2026:KER:20551



                 APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1              TRUE   COPY    OF   THE   NOTIFICATION    DATED

31.12.2019 PUBLISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE POST OF FIELD WORKER IN HEALTH SERVICE DEPARTMENT (CATEGORY NO.546/2019) Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ERRATUM NOTIFICATION NO: DR 5-2/50023/2018-KPSC DATED 12.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM IN O.A.(EKM)NO.331/2025. Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 19.11.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST APPLICANT. Annexure A4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 22.11.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND APPLICANT Annexure A4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 24.11.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD APPLICANT. Annexure A4(c) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 18.11.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH APPLICANT. Annexure A4(d) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 17.11.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH APPLICANT. Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.01.2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN O.P(KAT)NO.488/2025.

Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROBABILITY LIST PL.NO:20/2025/DOC DATED 28.11.2025 PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, KASARAGOD OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION.

Annexure A6(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PROBABILITY LIST PL.NO:19/2025/DOR DATED 04.12.2025 PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, THRISSUR OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION.

Annexure A6(b) TRUE COPY OF THE PROBABILITY LIST PL.NO:14/2025/DOH DATED 28.11.2025 PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION.

Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO. 44/2026/DOB PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, KASARAGOD OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION FOR THE POST OF FIELD WORKER WHICH CAME INTO EFFECT FROM 19.01.2026.

Annexure A7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO. 80/2026/DOH PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION FOR THE POST OF OP(KAT) NO. 78 OF 2026 14 2026:KER:20551 FIELD WORKER WHICH CAME INTO EFFECT FROM 30.01.2026.

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FILED AS O.A.(EKM) NO. 245/2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH AT ERNAKULAM Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 17.02.2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ADDITIONAL BENCH AT ERNAKULAM IN O.A.(EKM) NO.245/2026 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO.

117/2026/DOR PUBLISHED BY DISTRICT OFFICE, THRISSUR OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION FOR THE POST OF FIELD WORKER WHICH CAME INTO EFFECT FROM 09.02.2026 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDENDUM/ERRATUM NOTIFICATION DATED 23.02.2026 PUBLISHED BY THE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT OFFICE OF 3RD RESPONDENT COMMISSION

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court