IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17445 of 2007(B)
1. SUSAMMA NINAN, AGED 37 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY,
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
For Petitioner :SRI.MARTIN G.THOTTAN
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :14/10/2010
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No.17445 of 2007
==================
Dated this the 14th day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a physically handicapped person having 50%
permanent disability. The petitioner was appointed in the Kerala State
Electricity Board through employment exchange provisionally.
Subsequently, the petitioner was disengaged after the provisional
employment period was over. According to the petitioner, as per the
Government orders on the subject, physically handicapped persons,
who have been disengaged after provisional employment, are entitled
to re-employment. Therefore, the petitioner sought re-employment.
The petitioner was favoured with Ext.P6 reply by the Electricity Board,
which reads thus:
“Inviting attention to the reference cited. The G.O(P)
No.33/2005/SWD dated 05.03.2005 has not been adopted in the Board
for implementation, as some clarifications are required from the
Government. Hence the matter has been taken up with the Government.
The list of Physically Handicapped persons who were in provisional
service of the Board during the period from 15.08.98 to 15.08.99 and
completed 179 days of service has been sent to Government. The list
includes the name of Smt.Susamma Ninan. Re-appointment/
regularization of the Physically Handicapped persons engaged during 98-
99 can be considered only on receipt of a direction from the
Government.”
The petitioner has filed this writ petition, since even after three
months, no steps were taken pursuant to Ext.P6.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent
taking the stand that the Government order on the subject has not
w.p.c.17445/07 2
been adopted by the Board for implementation and, therefore,
clarification was sought by Ext.P6. It is because no clarification was
received, further proceedings were not taken, is the contention raised.
The learned Government Pleader submits that as per the Government
orders, all statutory Boards and other establishments under the
Government have been specifically directed to implement that order,
a decision pursuant to which has to be taken by the Board and
therefore it was not necessary for the Board to seek clarification in the
matter.
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
4. The respondents do not dispute before me the fact that the
petitioner is eligible for the benefit of the said Government order. The
Government Pleader submits that the Government have issued to all
statutory authorities under the Government to implement that order.
The Electricity Board cannot dispute the fact that they are bound by the
orders of the Government. That being so, I hold that the Government
order granting benefit to physically handicapped employees, who have
been provisionally employed and terminated from service later, is
applicable to the Kerala State Electricity Board also. That being so, the
respondents 2 and 3 are liable to reinstate the petitioner in service in
accordance with the Government order, G.O(P)No.33/2005-SWD/dtd.
5.3.2005. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to give the
w.p.c.17445/07 3
petitioner the benefit of the said Government order within three weeks
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge