High Court Kerala High Court

K.A. Mini vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
K.A. Mini vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 34747 of 2009(K)


1. K.A. MINI, KALATHARAYIL VEEDU,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SUMATHY K.K., MOOLAUZHATHIL VEEDE,
3. SWARANAMMAL, KALLUMADATHIL,
4. LEELA DEVI K.K.,
5. SUBHASKUMAR M.S.,
6. ATHIRA RAJAN, VAYALUMKAL,
7. SUNNY C.J.,
8. BIJU JOSE, KALLUVELIL,
9. SABU P.K,
10. BEENA THOMAS, CHETHIPUZHA HOUSE,
11. USHA REJI, THANNIKKAL HOUSE,
12. SNEHALATHA, PALLAZHTHU HOUSE,
13. JAYASREE C.R.,
14. SUNI JOY, KANNIYATHARAYIL

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDARY,

3. JOINT DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDARY,

4. PROJECT OFFICER, PIG BREEDING FARM,

5. PROJECT OFFICER, POULTRY FARM,

6. PROJECT OFFICER, POULTRY FARM,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :03/12/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                  -------------------------
                  W.P.(C.) No.34747 of 2009 (K)
             ---------------------------------
           Dated, this the 3rd day of December, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

Prayer sought in this writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd

respondent to consider Ext.P6 series of representations filed by the

petitioners for regularisation in service.

2. According to the petitioners, they are temporary workers

attached to the Pig Breeding Farm at Kappad, and Paultry Farm at

Chengannur and Manarcaud. It is stated that persons similar to

them working in other establishments have already been

regularised, and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled to similar

treatment. It is urging this claim that the aforesaid representations

have been made, which are pending before the 2nd respondent.

Having regard to the above, this writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6

series of representations referred to above. This shall be done as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of

WP(C) No.34747/2009
-2-

production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ

petition.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg