Allowed

Janaki v. Kappur Grama Panchayath & Another

Kerala HC13 Jun 2016WP(C)/1167/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a part-time sweeper, challenged termination of services. Court held she qualifies for regularization under a 2005 Government Order as sweeping area exceeded 100 sq. meters. Ordered respondents to forward regularization proposal to Government.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to submit regularization proposal within one month; petitioner allowed to continue in service and granted consequential benefits.

Janaki Vs Kappur Grama Panchayath & Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/23RD JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 1167 of 2011 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

JANAKI, D/O.KORMAN, AGED 46 YEARS, MADAKKAT HOUSE, KAPPUR VILLAGE, P.O.KUMARANELLUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. KAPPUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. ITS SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY, P.O.KUMARANELLUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 552.

¶11

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PALAKKAD - 679 552.

¶12

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN

¶13

R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.FAZIL

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

WP(C).No. 1167 of 2011 (U)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶19

EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.05.2006 BEARING NO. 6438/H2/06.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION DATED 28.05.2010 BY KAPPUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3: PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH THE ANNEXURE.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.01.2011.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P(C) No.1167 of 2011-U

¶30

Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2016

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioner, who is working as a Part-time Sweeper working under the 1^st respondent Panchayat since the year 2001, filed this Writ Petition when steps were taken by the Panchayat for termination of her services.

¶33

The petitioner submits that her services as Part-time Sweeper are to be regularized, in the light of the Government Order G.O(P) No.501/05/Fin. dated 25.11.2005, according to which, the casual sweepers/part-time sweepers, who were working in the Panchayats as on the date of that order, ie. 25.11.2005, were to be regularized, provided, there is a sweeping area of more than 100 sq.meters. As per the said Government Order, the appointing authorities/Head of the officers were directed to see that the sweeping area of the offices in which the casual sweepers were engaged were got measured by the PWD officials and in case there was no sanctioned post of Part Time Sweeper and in case the area of

¶34

W.P(C) No.1167 of 2011-U 2

¶35

sweeping was found to exceed 100 sq.meters, the Head of offices were to take up the matter with the Government along with all the details relating to their appointment as well as request for creation of a post of part-time contingent sweeper, in case there is no post, along with the proposal for regularisation.

¶36

The petitioner has produced Ext.P3 form, which shows that the sweeping area of the Panchayat has been measured and found to be 234.04 sq.meters. Along with the prescribed application for creation of the post, the Panchayat has forwarded its proposal dated 19.06.2010 to the Deputy Director of Panchayat, Palakkad for regularization of the services of the petitioner who has been working in the Panchayat from 1.3.2005 onwards. Even though this proposal is seen to have been forwarded on 19.03.2010, the Panchayat had issued Ext.P4 order informing the petitioner that her services were terminated on the basis of the decision taken by the Panchayat on 18.12.2010. The petitioner is continuing on the basis of the interim order granted by this Court on 13.01.2011.

¶37

The Panchayat, who is the 1^st respondent, or the Deputy Director of Panchayats, who is the 2^nd respondent, has not filed any counter affidavit. As per the Government Order

¶38

W.P(C) No.1167 of 2011-U 3

¶39

dated 25.11.2005, as mentioned in the previous paragraphs, the Panchayat is bound to take up the case of the petitioner for regularization of her service. The directions in the Government Order dated 25.11.2005 is reiterated in the subsequent orders issued by the Government.

¶40

Therefore, in case the proposal Ext.P3 is not forwarded, the Panchayat shall take necessary steps for furnishing the proposal for regularization of the petitioner to the Government, in tune with the guidelines in the Government Order dated 25.11.2005, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Government shall thereupon pass orders on the same within a further period of two months. The petitioner shall be allowed to continue in service and she shall be granted all consequential benefits.

¶41

This Writ Petition is allowed accordingly.

¶42

Sd/- (P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)

¶43

rtr/

Janaki v. Kappur Grama Panchayath & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janaki v. Kappur Grama Panchayath & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajamanickam Vs Shornur Muncipality

T.P.Ramla Vs Corporation of Kochi and Others

Biju.C. Vs Institute of Human Resources Development

George John Vs M.G.Rajamanikyam

S.a.Sathar Haji Vs the Perinthalmanna Municipality

Ansar Vs Tahsildar