Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Direct Challenge Against Genuineness of Qualifications Falls Outside the Jurisdiction of the CAT: Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court, comprising Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, held that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) does not possess the jurisdiction to directly adjudicate the genuineness of educational certificates used for the selection of staff nurses under the Lakshadweep Administration.

The case, Fayazkhan H.K. & Anr. vs. The Director of Medical & Health Services, Kavaratti & Ors., involved the challenge against the selection of the third and fourth respondents as staff nurses in Lakshadweep, questioning the authenticity of their nursing certificates.

Legal Point: The key legal point was whether the CAT had the authority to evaluate the authenticity of educational certificates in matters of staff nurse selection.

Facts and Issues: The petitioners alleged that the appointments of respondents 3 and 4 were irregular and illegal, focusing on the validity of their nursing certificates issued by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council and the Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council, respectively. The central issue was the jurisdiction of the CAT in dealing with the authenticity of these certificates.

Jurisdiction of CAT: The Court emphasized that the CAT cannot directly challenge the validity of certificates issued by statutory councils. This is outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The distinction between a direct challenge and a collateral challenge to the validity of qualifications was highlighted.

Issue of Delay and Jurisdiction: The Tribunal initially declined to intervene due to the delay in challenging the selection. The High Court, however, directed the Tribunal to reconsider based on merit, condoning the delay. Despite this, the Tribunal maintained its stance on the lack of jurisdiction over certificate validity.

Challenge Based on Late Submission of Credentials: The petitioners contended that the selected candidates submitted their credentials past the cut-off date. The Court dismissed this challenge, noting the absence of a requirement in the employment notification for submitting original certificates by the cut-off date.

Decision: The High Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision, dismissing the original petition. It was concluded that the allegations lacked merit and fell outside the CAT’s jurisdiction concerning the genuineness of certificates.

Date of Decision: February 21, 2024

Fayazkhan H.K. & Anr. Vs. The Director of Medical & Health Services, Kavaratti & Ors.

Similar News