IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13725 of 2009(I)
1. M.K.LALIKUTTY,PART TIME CASUAL SWEEPER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY SECRETARY TO
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF HOEMOPATHY,
3. DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,THODUPUZHA,
4. THE MEDICAL OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :23/05/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P.(C) No. 13725 of 2009
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is presently working as Part-time
Casual Sweeper in the office of the fourth respondent. She
claimed regularization in service and thereafter, moved this
Court by filing W.P.(C) No.25886 of 2008. By Ext.P1
judgment delivered on 16.09.2008 this Court disposed of
that writ petition with a direction to the Government to
consider whether the petitioner is entitled to regularization
on the terms of G.O.(P) No. 501/2005/Fin. dated 25.11.2005.
The Government thereafter passed Ext.P2 order dated
21.2.2009 holding that petitioner is not entitled to
regularization for the reason that her engagement was
through the local Kudumbasree unit. Ext.P2 is under
challenge in this writ petition.
2. Paragraph 13 of G.O (P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated
25-11-2005 reads as follows:
“13. Part-time contingent sweepers will
be employed in new offices and also against
arising vacancies in future, only in accordanceW.P.(C) No. 13725/09 2
with the rules i.e., after getting the names from
the Employment Exchange. Under no
circumstances will any person be engaged
otherwise than through Employment Exchange. If
there is delay in making such postings, the
vacancies can be filled up for two months only,
through a contract with the local kudumbasree
Society. As the sweeping work requires only 1 to
2 hours of work a day, the Society shall be paid @
Rs.4 per sq. mtrs. plus Rs.250 as monthly
remuneration, subject to the condition that the
total monthly payment shall not be less than
Rs.600. It is reiterated that the payment will be
made to the society and not the individual.”
Ext.P2 discloses that petitioner was engaged on 01.12.2005,
after the Government order dated 25-11-2005 was issued.
On the terms of paragraph 13 of the Government order
dated 25-11-2005, the petitioner cannot claim
regularization in service. The petitioner is not a casual
sweeper who was in service on the date on which the
Government order dated 25.11.2005 was issued. She
was appointed only on 01.12.2005 through the local
Kudumbhasree unit. The Government order dated
25.11.2005 does not contemplate regularization of Part-time
Casual Sweepers appointed through local Kudumbhasree
W.P.(C) No. 13725/09 3
units after the Government order dated 25.11.2008 was
issued.
Therefore, the stand taken by the Government
cannot be faulted. The petitioner does not, in my opinion,
have a right to be regularized in service.
The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
JUDGE.
mn.