High Court Kerala High Court

J.Maheswari vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 6 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
J.Maheswari vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 6 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12583 of 2008(W)


1. J.MAHESWARI, PART TIME CONTINGENT
                      ...  Petitioner
2. S.AMBIKA DEVI, PART TIME CONTINGENT

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

3. CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) KERALA STATE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.M.PAREETH

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB

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

 Dated :06/11/2008

 O R D E R
                                P.N.Ravindran, J.
                        =====================
                         W.P(C).No.12583 of 2008
                        =====================

               Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008.

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioners are Part-time Scavengers working on contract basis

in the Kerala State Electricity Board, hereinafter referred to as the

“Board”, for short. The first petitioner claims that he is working since

1990 and the second petitioner claims that he is working since 1996.

The petitioners submit that pursuant to the direction issued by this

Court in Ext.P8 in O.P.No.16733 of 1998, the services of six Part-time

Sweepers/Scavengers were regularised as per Ext.P9 Board order dated

17.7.1997. The petitioners contend that they are also similarly placed

and are also entitled to be regularised in service and that they have in

Exts.P10 and P11 representations submitted to the Secretary of the

Board claimed regularisation in service.

2. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit contending

inter alia that Government orders governing regularisation of casual

employees do not apply to the Board and that in view of the Special

Rules, the petitioners cannot claim or be granted regularisation in

service. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that as the

petitioners are similarly situated as the six persons who were regularised

by Ext.P9 order, the petitioners are also entitled to regularisation. Faced

with that situation, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Board

WP(C) 12583/08 -: 2 :-

submitted that the Board will consider the request made by the

petitioners in Exts. P10 and P11 representations and pass orders thereon

at the earliest.

3. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to

the Secretary of the Board to place Exts.P10 and P11 before the Board.

The Board shall thereupon consider Exts.P10 and P11 representations in

the light of Ext.P9 Board order dated 17.7.2007 and take a final decision

in the matter. The Board shall while considering the request made by the

petitioner in Exts.P10 and P11 take note of the fact that the petitioners

are working as Part-time Scavengers since 1990 and 1996 respectively.

Final orders in the matter shall be passed within three months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.

ess 8/11