Kerala High Court Sets Aside KAT Order Allowing Dr Reena KJ To Continue As Director Of Health Services Despite Transfer
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (June 23) allowed the appeal filed by the State challenging the interim order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) that permitted Dr. Reena K.J. to continue as Director of Health Services (DHS) by staying, for two weeks, the orders transferring her from the post. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 342]
A detailed judgment is awaited.
The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. remarked that the Tribunal cannot undo an already completed administrative action whereby the 2nd respondent, Dr. Meenakshy V., had already taken additional charge of the post with effect from June 13, even before the original application was filed before the Tribunal.
It pronounced in open court:
"When it prima facie appears that the second respondent has already taken full additional charge of the post of Director of Health Services with effect from 13.06.2026, the Tribunal committed a grave error in granting an interim order of stay, on 18.06.2026, the implementation of all proceedings of Annexure A4 [transfer order] as modified by Annexure A5 for a period of 2 weeks and allowing the applicant to continue as a Director of Health Services during that period, thereby, virtually replacing the second respondent, who was holding additional charge of that post with effect from 13.06.2026.
Once, as it prima facie appears, Annexure A4 order has already been implemented and the second respondent has taken additional charge of the post of the Director of Health Services on 13.06.2026, an order of interim stay, as sought for in the OA No. 950 of 2026 cannot undo the complete administrative act as if it never happened.
An order of interim stay is sought for in an original application is not meant to reverse the consequences on account of the implementation of an order under challenge, which has already taken place even before that original application came up for admission before the Tribunal.
If the order under challenge has already been implemented, an interim stay of that an order may be ineffective and the appropriate question to be considered in case a proper interim relief is sought for is whether the restoration of status quo ante is justified on the merits of the case.
In the above circumstances, we find no reason to sustain Exhibit P5 interim order dated 18.06.2025 of the Tribunal in OA No. 950 of 2026. In the result, this original petition is allowed by setting aside Exhibit P5 interim order..."
The High Court had heard the case in detail yesterday before reserving its verdict. Advocate S.P. Aravindakshan Pillay appeared for Dr. Reena whereas the Additional Advocate General argued on behalf of the State.
Background
Dr. Reena K.J. was appointed as the Director of Health Services, initially for a period of 2 years. Thereafter, on August 20, 2025, her tenure was extended by one year. Before the extended tenure was over, a transfer order was issued by the Joint Secretary, transferring Dr. Reena to the post of Director, Regional Public Health Laboratory, Ernakulam.
In the first order issued, two reasons were cited. One was that Dr. Reena had completed 3 years in the post and presently, the selection process for appointment of a regular DHS is under consideration of the government. The second was that she had availed 15 days' leave during the epidemic period. The second reason was deleted in the subsequent order passed. It was also stated that due to the ongoing surveillance and response activities relating to Shigella and Nipah outbreaks in the State, the post of the DHS cannot be left vacant till regular appointments are made.
Challenging both these orders, Dr. Reena approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT). She had raised three grounds to challenge her transfer. It was contended that the order was passed by an authority not competent to; that the order violated laws in force; and that it was issued by a colourable exercise of authority.
Advocate S.P. Aravindakshan Pillay, who appeared for Dr. Reena before the KAT also, argued that the transferred post was not one in the Administrative Branch of the Service. Further, it was pointed out that the first order was issued without any reference or report from any other sources, by one Joint Secretary. Moreover, there is no tenure fixed for DHS and her transfer was ordered prior to completion of the extended tenure, i.e., August 20, 2026, without any valid reasons.
The State's stand before the KAT was that her tenure ended on February 22, 2025 and therefore, the one-year extension should be considered from that day, till February 22, 2026. It was further contended that the transfer was made in public interest. It, however, admitted that there is no prescribed period of appointment for the DHS but it is upto the government to appoint an eligible person for the post.
After hearing the parties, the KAT noted that there is no contention that the process for selecting a new DHS has been set in motion. It observed that Dr. Reena's contention that her transfer is in violation of the Special Rules is prima facie found sustainable. It was also opined that further examination is required to see if the Joint Secretary was competent to pass the challenged orders.
Thus, on June 18, the KAT had passed an interim order staying the transfer orders for a period of two weeks, permitting Dr. Reena to continue as DHS.
Case No: OP(KAT) 194/ 2026
Case Title: State of Kerala v. Dr. Reena K.J. and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 342
Counsel for the respondents: S.P. Aravindakshan Pillay