IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1078 of 2010()
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRSENTED BY ITS
... Petitioner
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER(ADMINISTRATION)<
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,IRRIGATION
Vs
1. BHAGYAM
... Respondent
2. VEERAMMA, W/O.ARULAPPAN,
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.P.RAVINDRAN(SR)
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :20/08/2010
O R D E R
J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------
W.A.No.1078 of 2010
-------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of August, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Ravindran, J.
The appellants are the respondents in W.P.(C)
No.34359 of 2004. The respondents are the petitioners therein.
The brief facts of the case are as follows.
2. The respondents herein were employed as CLR
(Casual Labour Roll) workers for construction of the Malampuzha
Dam and canals during the period 1967-1978. By Ext.P1 order
dated 20.1.1990, the Government recognised the right of CLR
workers who have put in 500 days of service before 19.5.1983
for absorption into regular service. Such of those CLR workers
who had not put in 500 days of service before 19.5.1983 were to
be absorbed as SLR (Seasonal Labour Roll) workers. The
Government had also fixed 31.7.1992 as the cut of date to
submit applications claiming the benefit of Ext.P1 order.
W.A.No.1078 of 2000
2
3. The respondents herein submitted applications for
absorption in service within the said time, viz., on 18.4.1992.
But the applications reached the Government only after
31.7.1992. Their application for absorption into regular service
were therefore rejected. The respondents thereupon filed
O.P.No.5182 of 1998 in this Court. By Ext.P2 judgment
delivered on 11.1.2002, a learned single Judge of this Court
interfered with the order passed by the Government rejecting
the applications filed by the respondents and directed
reconsideration of their applications for regularisation. The
Government thereupon passed Ext.P3 order directing absorption
of the respondents and three others in service as SLR workers.
The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Malampuzha,
thereafter issued Ext.P4 order dated 1.1.2003 giving effect to
the decision of the Government. However, the respondents were
absorbed as SLR workers only with effect from the date on which
they joined duty pursuant to Ext.P4. Claiming regularisation as
SLR workers with effect from 31.7.1992, they filed Ext.P5
W.A.No.1078 of 2000
3
representation on 29.10.2004 before the Government. The
instant writ petition was thereafter filed, seeking a direction to
the appellants to absorb the respondents into regular service
with retrospective effect from 13.4.1992.
4. The appellants resisted the writ petition contending
that respondents can claim absorption into service only with
effect from the date of Ext.P4, viz., 1.1.2003. The learned single
Judge relying on the decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No.30320
of 2004 held that the regularisation of the respondents shall
take effect from 1.11.1992 with consequential benefits, if any.
Aggrieved thereby, the appellants have preferred this appeal.
5. We heard Sri.Benny Gervacis, the learned Senior
Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and
Sri.P.Ravindran, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the
respondents. We have also gone through the pleadings and
materials on record. The learned Senior Government Pleader for
the appellants contended that the judgment in W.P.(C) No.30320
of 2004 relied on by the learned Single Judge has been modified
W.A.No.1078 of 2000
4
by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2625 of 2007,
wherein the Division Bench of this Court directed that the
absorption of the petitioner in that writ petition shall be given
effect from the date on which another worker similarly placed
was absorbed as SLR worker, after 31.7.1992. A copy of the
judgment in W.A.No.2625 of 2007 was made available to us for
perusal. We have gone through the same.
6. It is an admitted fact that it was relying on the
decision in W.P.(C) No.30320 of 2004 that the instant writ
petition was allowed. In view of the decision of the Division
Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2625 of 2007, whereby the
decision of the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No.30320 of 2004
was modified, the relief granted in the instant writ petition also
requires to be suitably modified. The learned counsel for the
respondents does not dispute the said preposition. In such
circumstances, we modify the judgment of the learned single
Judge and direct that Ext.P3 Government order and Ext.P4 order
issued by the 3rd appellant shall take effect from the date on
W.A.No.1078 of 2000
5
which CLR workers similarly placed as the respondents and
having the same length of CLR service before 19.5.1983 were
absorbed as SLR workers after 31.7.1992. Needless to say, the
respondents will be entitled to all consequential benefits from
that date, except payment of arrears of salary. The respondents
will be entitled to receive salary and allowances applicable to
SLR workers only with effect from the date of Ext.P4. A decision
in that regard shall be taken and orders passed within three
months from the date on which respondents produce a certified
copy of this judgment before the second respondent.
The writ appeal is disposed of with the above
observations.
J.CHELAMESWAR,
Chief Justice
P.N.RAVINDRAN,
Judge.
nj.