High Court Kerala High Court

T.T. Devayani vs Kerala Motor Workers Welfare Fund … on 31 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
T.T. Devayani vs Kerala Motor Workers Welfare Fund … on 31 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 19698 of 2004(T)


1. T.T. DEVAYANI, AGED 48 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA MOTOR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC,KMTWF BOARD

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :31/08/2010

 O R D E R
                            S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

                     ==================

                      W.P.(C).No. 19698 of 2004

                     ==================

              Dated this the 31st day of August, 2010.

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is working as a part-time sweeper in the office

of the 2nd respondent continuously from October 1999 onwards.

Originally, the petitioner was paid monthly salary of Rs.110/-

which was enhanced to Rs.600/- per month. Petitioner was also

being paid bonus every year at the rate of Rs.500/-. Petitioner

filed a representation for permission to continue as part time

sweeper and for regularisation of the service of petitioner. On

receipt of Ext.P2, the first respondent terminated the service of

the petitioner. It is under the above circumstance petitioner has

filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:-

“I. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents not to discharge
the service of the petitioner as part time
sweeper in the 2nd respondent’s office and not
replace her with a temporary hand.

I (a). declare that in view of Ext.P3, the
petitioner is entitled to be regularized in the
post of part time contingent employee,
created in the office of the 2nd respondent, on
the basis of the actual sweeping area
available in the 2nd respondent’s office.”

W.P.(C).No. 19698 of 2004 2

II. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents not to
terminate the service of the petitioner
without following the statutory proceedings.

III. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the 1st respondent to consider
and pass orders on Ext.P2 within such time as
may be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

IV. Issue such other orders, writs or directions
as are deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court;

        V.    Award cost of     this proceeding to the
        petitioner."


2. A counter affidavit has been filed wherein the contention

taken by the first respondent is that by Ext.R1(a) the District

Employment Officer, Thrissur, informed the first respondent that

the engagement of the petitioner is in violation of the

Employment Exchange Compulsory Notification Act 1959 and,

therefore, the service of the petitioner has to be terminated and

the vacancy notified to the Employment Exchange. The first

respondent therefore seeks to justify the action taken by the first

respondent in terminating the service of the petitioner.

3. Petitioner would contend that petitioner was also

originally engaged by undergoing a selection process, since no

candidate were available with the Employment Exchange, which

was certified by Local Employment Exchange. She further

W.P.(C).No. 19698 of 2004 3

contends that in view of Ext.P3 Government Order, she is

entitled to be continued to be engaged and also for regularisation

in service.

4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. By virtue

of the interim order passed in this case the petitioner is

continuing in service. In Ext.P3 Government Order passed in

respect of engagement and regularisation of casual sweepers it

is directed thus in paragraph 8:-

“8.For the regularisation of the existing casual
sweepers (where the sweeping area exceeds
100 sq.mtrs.), creation of posts of part-time
contingent employees depending on the
sweeping area has to be made. The sweeping
area will be calculated in accordance with the
guidelines given in the Appendix. If, on
fixation, the area is seen to exceed 100 sq.
mtrs. and if there is no post of part-time
sweeper sanctioned for the office in question,
but there is a casual sweeper being engaged
the Head of the Office shall immediately take up
with the Government for creation of a post of
part-time contingent sweeper. Copies of the
certificate of the PWD Engineer and full details
of the case in the pro forma in the Annexe shall
be furnished along with the proposal. The
Administrative Department in Government shall
then issue orders (within a period of 4 months
from the date of this order), in consultation
with the Finance Department, for the creation
of the post of part-time sweeper in relaxation of
the economy orders and absorbing the existing
Casual Sweeper by giving the remuneration of
Rs.1,250/- plus D.A. p.m (for area of 100
sq.mtrs. and above but below 400 sq. mtrs.)

W.P.(C).No. 19698 of 2004 4

and Rs.1500 plus D.A. p.m.(for area of 400
sq.mtrs. and above but below 800 sq. mtrs.).
The posts shall be created only with prospective
effect and all absorption/regularisation also
shall be done with prospective effect only. No
back arrears shall be payable. The period
spent prior to regularisation being casual
service shall not count for any purpose.”

I am satisfied that petitioner is entitled to the benefit of

the said Government Order. In the above circumstances, this

writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to take

steps in accordance with the above said Government Order in the

matter of engagement and regularisation of the petitioner as a

sweeper. Needless to say, in view of my above findings, the

petitioner has to be continued to be engaged as part-time

sweeper till final orders are passed in accordance with Ext.P3

Government Order which shall be done as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate within 2 months from the date of receipt of

a copy of this judgment.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

mns