High Court Kerala High Court

Elsamma vs State Of Kerala on 30 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Elsamma vs State Of Kerala on 30 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12331 of 2009(J)


1. ELSAMMA, AGED 46 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO
                       ...       Respondent

2. NEEZHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

3. THE SECRETARY,

4. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS,

5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS,

6. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.R.S.KALKURA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :30/06/2009

 O R D E R
                               P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                       W.P.(C) No. 12331 of 2009 J
                 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                   Dated this the 30th day of June, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

Heard Sri. M.G.Karthikeyan, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, Sri.Antony Mukkath, the learned Government Pleader appearing

for respondents 1 and 4 to 6 and Sri. R.S.Kalkura, the learned counsel

appearing for respondents 2 and 3.

The petitioner is a Casual Sweeper engaged by the second

respondent panchayat ever since the year 1998. She claimed regularization

in service on the terms of G.O.(P) No.501/05/Fin dated 25-11-2005. Her

application for regularization in service was forwarded by the panchayat

along with Ext.P5 letter dated 21-8-2007 and Ext.P6 sweeping area

certificate. The Deputy Director of Panchayats, Kottayam however rejected

the petitioner’s request for regularization on the ground that as a daily rated

employee, she is not entitled to the benefit of G.O.(P) No.501/2005/Fin.

dated 25-11-2005. Ext.P7 order passed by the Deputy Director of

Panchayats, Kottayam is in that regard is under challenge in this writ

petition. The petitioner also seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus

W.P.(C) No. 12331 of 2009 2

commanding the respondents to regularize her in service as Part-time

Sweeper.

3. A reading of Ext.P7 indicates that the petitioner’s request for

regularization was rejected by the Deputy Director of Panchayats, Kottayam

on the short ground that the Government order dated 25-11-2005 does not

govern Casual Sweepers appointed on daily wage basis. A learned Single

Judge of this Court has in W.P.(C) No. 19186 of 2005 and connected cases

held that the Government order dated 25-11-2205 would govern casual

employees engaged on daily wage basis also. A similar view has been taken

by another learned Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 26149 of 2008.

Ext.P6 discloses that total sweeping area of the office where the petitioner is

employed exceeds 100 Sq. mts. The petitioner is therefore entitled to be

regularized in service.

In the result, the writ petition is allowed, Ext.P7 is quashed and the

Government are directed to pass orders regularizing the service of the

petitioner in terms of G.O.(P) No. 501/2005/Fin. dated 25-11-2005. In

order to enable the Government to act as directed above, the Deputy

Director of Panchayats, Kottayam shall forward the files to the Government

along with the accompanying documents. This shall be done within one

month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of

W.P.(C) No. 12331 of 2009 3

this judgment before him. The Government shall within three months

thereafter pass orders as directed above, after affording the petitioner a

reasonable opportunity of being heard. Till such time, status quo as on today

shall be maintained. The Government shall after orders are passed as

directed above, communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner and the third

respondent.

P.N.RAVINDRAN,
JUDGE.

mn.