[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Anil V.K vs Dr. Reena K.J on 31 January, 2026

Author: Anil K.Narendran

Bench: Anil K.Narendran

                                          1
Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025                                  2026:KER:7568

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                       PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

                                          &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

      SATURDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 11TH MAGHA, 1947

                             CON.CASE(C) NO. 1924 OF 2025

          AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.06.2025 IN OP(KAT) NO.97 OF 2023

OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

                  ANIL V.K.,AGED 47 YEARS,S/O. K. KARUNAKARAN NAIR,
                  JUNIOR HEALTH INSPECTOR GRADE-I, PRIMARY HEALTH
                  CENTRE, CHEMPAKAPARA, IDUKKI, RESIDING AT PLOT NO. 81,
                  INDIRA NAGAR, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
                  695005

                  BY ADVS.
                  SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
                  SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR
                  SRI.SABU PULLAN
                  SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
                  SHRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN
                  SHRI.BHARATH MOHAN
                  DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)


RESPONDENT/9TH RESPONDENT:

                  DR. REENA K.J., AGE AND HUSBAND'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO
                  THE PETITIONER, DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, GENERAL
                  HOSPITAL JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035

                  BY ADV A.J VARGHESE, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

         THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) WAS FINALLY HEARD ON
23.01.2026, THE COURT ON            31.01.2026 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                        2
Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025                                   2026:KER:7568


                                 JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

This Contempt Case (Civil) is filed by the petitioner alleging wilful

disobedience of Annexure-1 order dated 17.06.2025 passed by this

Court in O.P.(KAT) No.97 of 2023.

2. The petitioner filed O.P.(KAT) No.97 of 2023, invoking the

supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 23.02.2023 of the

Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at Ernakulam, in

O.A.(EKM)No.203 of 2021. The petitioner is working as Junior Health

Inspector Grade II in the Health Services Department. His next

promotion post is Junior Health Inspector Grade I, then Health

Inspector, Health Supervisor, Technical Assistant and so on. According

to the petitioner, the inter se dispute between the petitioner and the

contesting respondents involved a substantial question of law, and there

are diverse opinions of two Division Benches. Accordingly, by the order

dated 17.06.2025, this Court referred the matter for consideration by

a Full Bench. It is also ordered that till further orders are passed in the

reference, no promotion shall be effected without the leave of the Court.

But in total violation of the said order, the respondent promoted Health

Supervisors as Technical Assistant Grade II and Health Inspector Grade

II as Health Supervisor. Unless and until the issue is resolved by the

Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025 2026:KER:7568

Full Bench, further promotions are restricted by Annexure-1 order. But

the respondent issued Annexures 2 and 4 promotion orders dated

15.07.2025 and 07.08.2025, respectively, and the same is a clear

contempt of the order of this Court dated 17.06.2025.

3. The respondent filed an affidavit dated 08.10.2025, producing

therewith Annexure R1 (a) document. To that affidavit, the petitioner

filed a reply affidavit dated 07.11.2025.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Senior Government Pleader.

5. In O.P.(KAT) No.97 of 2023, along with two other similar

original petitions, by the order dated 17.06.2025, this Court considered

the dispute with regard to the qualification referred to in item No. (iii)

of the qualifications prescribed for the post of Junior Health Inspector

Grade II as per G.O.(MS) No.24/89/H & FWD dated 23.01.1989. On

finding that the law laid down in W.A.No.2284 of 2000 and connected

cases, followed in O.P. (KAT)No.135 of 2015 and connected cases, was

not the correct law, the Division Bench referred the original petitions for

consideration by a Full Bench. It was further directed that till further

orders are passed in the reference, no promotion shall be effected

without the leave of the Court. According to the petitioner, by Annexures

2 and 4 orders, the respondent promoted Health Supervisors as

Technical Assistant Grade II and Health Inspector Grade II to Health

Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025 2026:KER:7568

Supervisor. But the stand of the respondent in the affidavit dated

08.10.2025 is that the post of Technical Assistant Grade II, which is a

further higher post of Health Supervisor. Since the promotion to the

cadre of Health Supervisor has been made from the seniority list

pertaining to the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000, any promotion

to a higher post could only be made from the same or from the previous

seniority list. Hence, the same does not come under the purview of the

order under challenge in O.P.(KAT)No.97 of 2023. Paragraphs 7 to 13

of the affidavit dated 08.10.2025 filed by the respondent read thus:

"7. Therefore, the seniority list prior to 01/04/2000,which has been finalized in accordance with judgement of the Hon'ble High Court dated 02.03.2018 in OP(KAT) 135 of 2015 and the subject matter in SLP (Civil) No.12363 of 2018. The Honourable Supreme Court in the above SLP (Civil) No.12363 of 2018 ordered that, "leave is granted, any promotion shall be subject to the outcome of the appeal". Therefore, the incumbents, who were appointed prior to 01.04.2000 are entitled for promotion and their promotion will be subject to the outcome of the above referred SLP. Their promotion and seniority is no way affect the fixation of seniority and promotion of those Junior Health Inspectors Grade-II and later promoted as Junior Health Inspectors Grade-I. Their further promotion to the higher posts namely to the post of Health Inspector Grade-

II is no way affected the seniority or further promotion of the petitioner in the above Contempt of Court case.

Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025 2026:KER:7568

8. It is submitted that the seniority list under consideration in OP(KAT) 135 of 2015 was that of Junior Health Inspector Grade-II in this Department for the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000. Subsequent to the order dated 02.03.2018 in OP(KAT) 135 of 2015, this respondent had published the seniority list of Junior Health Inspector Grade-Il for the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000 vide order dated 08.11.2018. Copy of the proceedings No.ES1- 14462/2015/DHS dated 08.11.2018 is produced herewith as Annexure R1(a) for reference.

9. It is respectfully submitted that on a careful perusal of the promotion order, it could be noted that the incumbents bearing rank number 22 to 98 in the promotion list is one relating to the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000. Since the said seniority list has been made absolute in view of the judgement dated 02.03.2018 in OP(KAT) 135 of 2015 and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, all further promotions of the incumbents who were appointed in between the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000 shall be subjected to the outcome of the SLP.

10. The order produced as Annexure-2 by the Petitioner effects promotion to the post of Technical Assistant Grade- II which is the further higher post of Health Supervisor. Since the promotion to the cadre of Health Supervisor have been made from the seniority list pertaining to the period from 01.01.1997 to 31.03.2000, any promotion to higher posts could only be made from the same or previous seniority list. Hence the same does not come under the purview of the order under challenge as in OP(KAT) 97 of

2023 and others and accordingly the alleged Contempt of Court is an experimental one and misconceived. The petitioner has no case that promotion was effected in favour of an appointee after 01.04.2000. This Honourable Court as per order dated 17.06.2025 ordered that "Till further orders are passed in these matters on reference, no promotion shall be effected without leave of the Court" applies to the promotions that have to be made from the seniority list under challenge in those litigations and is not relevant in the seniority list which has been deemed as settled under law as of now. The petitioner has no grievances against any persons appointed prior to 1.4.2000.

11. Therefore, the above contempt of court has filed before this Hon'ble Court without any bonafide and an abuse of process of law. Therefore, the above COC is filed by the petitioner with extreme malafide and personal gain. The petitioner ought not to have prefer the above COC alleging contempt since the petitioner has no grievances or prayer against any one of them for the admitted fact that all those promotees are seniors to the petitioner and all of them were appointed prior to 1.4.2000. The Petitioner, being an appointee after 31.03.2000, have no right to challenge the promotions effected from previous seniority list, since the said seniority list was finalized in years back and settled by law.

12. In the light of the direction of the Hon. High Court, vide order dated 17.06.2025 in OP(KAT) 97 of 2023 and connected cases, no promotions shall be effected from the seniority list of Junior Health Inspector Grade-II from

01.04.2000 to 31.10.2007. At present around 112 vacancies of Health Inspector Grade-II posts are vacant existing in this Department. In order effect promotion a review Petitions are prepared by the State and its officers for the grant of permission from this Honourable Court.

13. In view of the above facts, it is submitted that this Respondent has not violated any directions of the Hon'ble High Court and the alleged Contempt of Court is the one raised on purported misinterpretation of facts intended to mislead the Hon'ble Court. Accordingly, it is humbly prayed that the Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to close the above contempt of court, since the same is an abuse of process and totally misleading".

6. Having considered the materials on record and the submissions

made at the Bar, we are of the opinion that if the petitioner has any

grievance against Annexures 2 and 4 orders, the remedy available to

the petitioner is to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. The

said orders passed by the respondent cannot be said as contempt of the

directions contained in the order dated 17.06.2025 in O.P.(KAT) No.97

of 2023, in view of the contentions taken by the respondent in the

affidavit dated 08.10.2025, as extracted above. In such circumstances,

we find no ground to hold that the petitioner has made out a prima facie

case of contempt by the respondent.

In the result, the contempt case stands closed, however, without

prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge Annexures 2 and 4

orders dated 15.07.2025 and 07.08.2025, respectively, in accordance

with law, if he is aggrieved by the said orders.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

sks                               MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE

Con.Case(C)No.1924 of 2025                                 2026:KER:7568


                     APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) NO. 1924 OF 2025

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure-1                   CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-06-2025

Annexure-2                   TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. EG1-4456/2023/DHS
                             DATED 15-07-2025
Annexure-3                   TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. ED4-
                             18056/2025/HDS DATED 24-07-2025
Annexure -4                  TRUE     COPY    OF     THE     ORDER    NO.

DHS/10603/2023/E.G4 DATED 7-8-2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT RESPONDENT ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. ES1- 14462/2015/DHS DATED 08-11-2018