Challenge to appointment of retired employee by third party lacks locus standi and merit.

The Appellant, G. Kandan, filed a Writ Petition (W.P. No. 42026 of 2025) challenging the appointment of the 4th Respondent, T.A. Premakumari, on the grounds that she had secured public employment by producing a false community certificate

The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition on 05.11.2025, holding that the Appellant lacked locus standi to challenge the third party’s appointment and noting that the 4th Respondent had already retired from service

The Appellant subsequently filed this Writ Appeal to set aside the Single Judge’s order

1. Whether the Appellant has the locus standi to maintain a challenge against the appointment of a third party who has attained superannuation

2. Whether the Department can be directed to initiate an enquiry into allegations of a false community certificate against an employee who has already retired from service

The Court applied the principle of locus standi in service jurisprudence, which generally restricts third-party interference in employment matters unless a public interest is established

It further relied on the doctrine of finality in service matters, holding that once an employee reaches the age of superannuation and retires, the Department lacks the jurisdictional capacity to initiate disciplinary or administrative actions regarding the validity of their initial appointment or service conditions

The Court observed that the Appellant's challenge was directed at the 4th Respondent, who is a "third party" to the Appellant, thereby affirming the Writ Court's finding of a lack of locus standi

Reasoned that since the 4th Respondent had already attained the age of superannuation and retired, the Department no longer possessed the legal authority to initiate such an action, rendering the allegations effectively moot even if they were found to be true

The Court found no infirmity in the Single Judge’s application of these principles

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the Writ Appeal, affirming the order dated 05.11.2025 in W.P. No. 42026 of 2025. No costs were awarded