Kerala Government Requests Extension in High Court Contempt Proceedings
The Kerala state government has formally sought an additional week to submit its official reply before the High Court in a significant petition that demands the initiation of contempt of court proceedings against the chief secretary and other officials. This legal action stems from allegations that the state government has been illegally regularizing daily-wage and contract appointments, directly contravening a previous court order.
Court Grants Adjournment Until February 20
The bench presided over by Justice C P Mohamed Nias has granted the state government's request for more time, adjourning the petition to February 20, 2026, to allow for the submission of the government's detailed reply. This development follows a petition filed by M Abdul Vahid from Malappuram, who is seeking contempt proceedings against the chief secretary for allegedly violating a court order issued in 2025. The petitioner asserts that the state government has been regularizing contract appointments across various departments and public sector undertakings (PSUs) without adhering to legal protocols.
Allegations of Systematic Violations
In his petition, Vahid has raised serious concerns about the state government's ongoing efforts to regularize individuals who were appointed on a temporary basis without following due process. To substantiate his claims, he presented a copy of a Government Order (GO) dated January 3, 2026, which specifically regularized librarians, nursery-school teachers, and ayahs as part-time contingent employees. The petitioner argues that this action demonstrates a blatant disregard for the High Court's directives, as the state continues to engage in the regularization of appointments that were made illegally.
The case highlights broader issues of governance and accountability, with the petitioner contending that various state government departments are persistently taking steps to regularize such appointments, undermining the rule of law and court mandates. The outcome of this contempt petition could have significant implications for employment practices and legal compliance within the state administration.
