Dismissed

Girija Kumari v. Secretary to Government

Kerala HC15 Jan 2016WP(C)/25541/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition by temporary Anganwadi workers challenged their termination when regular hands were appointed. The High Court observed the petitioners were not in the seniority lists for regularization prepared in 2006 and 2010. Holding they must yield to regular appointments, the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Dismissed the writ petition; Petitioners to yield to regular appointments; No costs awarded.

Girija Kumari Vs Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/25TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 25541 of 2014 (P)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1. GIRIJA KUMARI, AGED 45 YEARS D/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SADANAM, ATHIYANNOOR KODANGAVILA P.O, ATHIYANNUR, ARALUMOODU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 123.

¶8

2. VALSALA, AGED 39 YEARS D/O.APPIYAMMA, KIRAN BHAVAN, MARUTHAMKODU VENPAKAL P.O.

¶9

3. VINITHAKUMARI, AGED 41 YEARS D/O.KAMALAMMA, KRISHNA VILASOM, KUNCHUVEETUVILA ARANGHAMUGHAL, ARALUMOODU P.O.

¶10

4. SINDHU, AGED 33 YEARS D/O.PANKAJAKSHY, ROHINI BHAVAN CHERUVILAKATHU CHANNELKARA, ARALUMOODU P.O.

¶11

5. PRATHIBHAKUMARI, AGED 31 YEARS D/O.LILLY, PONGUVILA VEEDU, MULLUVILA P.O.

¶12

6. SHEENA, AGED 30 YEARS D/O.SANTHAKUMARI, KEERAPATHIMELE KALLUVILA PUTHERIVEEDU, VENPAKAL P.O.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP

¶14

RESPONDENTS:

¶15

1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶16

2. THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER OFFICE OF DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶17

....2

¶18

WP(C).No. 25541 of 2014 (P)

¶19

-2-

¶20

3. ATHIYANNOOR ADDITIONAL CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER OFFICE OF ATHIYANNOOR ADDITIONAL CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER NEYYATTINKARA 695 121.

¶21

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A. FAYAZ

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).No. 25541 of 2014 (P)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶26

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 4.3.14 OF THE IST PETITIONER FOR THE 2ND SPELL FROM 5.3.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶27

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 31.3.14 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER FOR THE 2ND SPELL FROM 1.4.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶28

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT NIL DATED OF THE 3RD PETITIONER FOR THE 3RD SPELL FROM 5.3.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶29

EXHIBIT P3(A).COPY OF EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE FOR THE EARLIER SPELLS OF 133 DAYS AND 135 DAYS OF 3RD PETITIONER.

¶30

EXHIBTI P4. COPY OF ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 31.3.14 OF THE 4TH PETITIONER FOR THE 3RD SPELL FROM 1.4.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶31

EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF ORDER OF APPOINT DATED 28.3.14 OF THE 5TH PETITIONER FOR THE 3RD SPELL FROM 4.3.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶32

EXHIBTI P6. COPY OF ORDER OF APPOINT DATED 28.3.14 OF THE 6TH PETITIONER FOR THE 3RD SPELL FROM 1.3.14 FOR A PERIOD OF 179 DAYS.

¶33

EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF GO(MS)NO.73/2010 DATED 7.10.10.

¶34

EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF G.O(MS)NO.31/2012 DATED 30.5.12.

¶35

EXHIBIT P9. COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 16.8.14 BY PETITIONERS.

¶36

EXHIBIT P10. COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 28.8.14 IN WPC 5280/13.

¶37

EXHIBIT P11. COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 28.8.14 IN WPC 21711/14.

¶38

EXHIBIT P12. COPY OF NOTICE DATED 24.9.14 TO PETITIONER NO.2 OR THE PERSONAL HEARING ON 27.9.14.

¶39

EXHIBIT P13. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.1.

¶40

EXHIBIT P14. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.2.

¶41

EXHIBIT P15. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.3.

¶42

...2

¶43

WP(C).No. 25541 of 2014 (P)

¶44

-2-

¶45

EXHIBIT P16. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.4.

¶46

EXHIBIT P17. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.5.

¶47

EXHIBIT P18. COPY OF ORDER DATED 27.9.14 BY RESPONDENT NO.3 WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER NO.6.

¶48

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

JJJ

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

¶54

W.P.(C) No. 25541 of 2014 (P)

¶55

Dated this the 15^th day of January, 2016

¶56

J U D G M E N T

¶57

The petitioners are persons sought to be terminated after the terms of temporary appointment for 179 days. The petitioners were never in the seniority list of Anganwadi workers for regularisation, prepared in the years 2006 and 2010. The petitioners obtained a status quo order and is said to be continuing on the basis of that.

¶58

The lists of 2006 and 2010 were sought to be cancelled by G.O.(MS) No.31/2012/SWD dated 30.05.2012. The said Government Order has been set aside in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.(C) No.25614/2009 and connected cases, by judgment dated 24.7.2015. In compliance with the judgment, a new list is said to have been prepared for regularisation

¶59

of Anganwadi workers integrating the seniority lists

¶60

W.P.(C) No. 25541/2014

¶61

-2-

¶62

prepared in the years 2006 and 2010. The petitioners' name definitely do not find a place in the said list, since their appointment was much later, in the year 2014. The petitioners are also said to have been appointed on an interim arrangement, considering the requirement of Anganwadi workers without any due selection process.

¶63

In such circumstances, when regular hands are appointed, the petitioners would have to necessarily give way for the appointment of regular hands. Since there was an interim order of status quo, those petitioners who are continued shall be continued, but only till the regular hands join duty.

¶64

With the above observation the writ petition would stand dismissed. No Costs.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶67

jjj 15/1/16

Girija Kumari v. Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girija Kumari v. Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer & Others Vs Mini Jacob and Another

Samsida P S Vs State of Kerala

Dr.C.P.Antony Vs Govt of Kerala

Reshma E.V.M. Vs State of Kerala

Meenakshikutty M. Vs Child Development Project Officer

Radhamani Amma & Others Vs State of Kerala & Another