Recommendations Of Chief Justice In Matters Concerning Internal Administration & Functioning Of High Court Cannot Be Disregarded By State Government: Kerala High Court

The bench categorically said that High Court functioning differs from regular departments, as judicial and administrative work continues even during major holidays through vacation sittings, case processing, and file management, all of which require active supervision and coordination by Gazetted Officers.

A bench of Justice N. Nagaresh, thus observed, “When the facts being so, respondents 1 to 3 are not justified in rejecting the request made at the instance of the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court, who is the head of the High Court. The request emanated from a constitutional authority exercising absolute control under Article 229 over the conditions of service and functioning of the High Court establishment. The recommendations of the Chief Justice in matters concerning internal administration and functioning of the High Court cannot be disregarded by the Executive”.

The bench further ruled that the State’s refusal to exempt High Court Gazetted Officers from the amended Kerala Service Rules was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 229 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the High Court’s administrative independence.

Advocate Mathews K. Nelluvely appeared for the petitioner and P.K. Babu, Special Government Pleader (Finance) appeared for the respondent.

In the present matter, a writ petition was filed by the Kerala High Court Gazetted Officers’ Association challenging the State’s 2022 amendment to Appendix VII of the Kerala Service Rules, 2007 which extended the ineligibility for compensatory leave which was earlier applicable only to Heads of Offices. Pursuant to the amendment, the High Court administration revoked the long-standing practice of granting compensatory leave to its Gazetted staff.

Despite repeated representations by the Registrar General, acting on the directions of the Chief Justice, the State rejected the request for exemption through communications issued in the year 18-05-2023 and 19-12-2024 both without assigning any reasons.

The Association contended that Gazetted Officers of the High Court routinely discharge duties during court vacations, public holidays, and vacation sittings, including supervision of judicial and administrative work.

Rejecting the State’s justification that compensatory leave is merely a policy benefit, the Court noted that the functional realities of the High Court are materially different from other government departments, with administrative and judicial work continuing even during major holidays like Onam and Christmas.

Further relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court emphasised that recommendations of a Chief Justice must ordinarily be accepted and can be rejected only for strong and cogent reasons, none of which were present in this case.

Therefore, while setting aside the impugned government communications, the High Court directed the State to reconsider the proposal for granting compensatory leave to High Court Gazetted Officers within three months, strictly in conformity with Article 229 of the Constitution of India and the recommendations of the Chief Justice.

Cause Title: Kerala High Court Gazetted Officers' Association Represented By Its Secretary v. State Of Kerala [Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:6576]

Appearances:

Petitioner: Mathews K. Nelluvely, Reji Mathew. M, Mathew Varghese, Joel Reji Mathew and Andrew Mathews, Advocates.

Respondents: P.K. Babu, Special Government Pleader (Finance) And Aneesh James, Advocates.