Allowed

Chithra.R v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Mar 2017WP(C)/27475/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Government order denying regularization of the petitioner's appointment as Bacteriologist. The court held that the existing draft rules at the time of appointment permitted transfer-based appointment and noted the un-notified status of subsequent revised rules requiring direct recruitment, directing regularization with retrospective effect.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P12 order set aside; 1st Respondent directed to regularize petitioner's appointment as Bacteriologist from 02.06.2006.

Chithra.R Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2017/11TH PHALGUNA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 27475 of 2014 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

CHITHRA.R, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O. T.V.ARAVINDAKSHAN, BACTERIOLOGIST, QUALITY CONTROL DISTRICT LAB, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, KOLLAM-691 013.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.ANISON

¶9

SMT.V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD) SMT.P.A.RINUSA SMT.ANNIE JACOB

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY WATER RESOURCES (WATER SUPPLY-B) DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

2. THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶13

3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CR), KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶14

4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶15

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW, S.C

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-02-2017, THE COURT ON 02-03-2017 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Msd.

¶18

WP(C).No. 27475 of 2014 (H)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶21

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF GOVT. ORDER BEARING G.O.(RT).NO. 5033/95/LAD DATED 25.08.1995 SANCTIONING CREATION OF POSTS IN WATER AUTHORITY.

¶22

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF A TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT KERALA WATER AUTHORITY TECHNICAL SERVICE (SPECIAL) RULES 1990.

¶23

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO. KWA/JB/E7/17411/04 ISSUED BY THE WATER AUTHORITY DATED 25.11.2005 ALONG WITH APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 08.12.2005.

¶24

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY APPOINTMENT ORDER BEARING NO. KWA/JB/E7/17411/2004 DATED 01.06.2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT PROVISIONALLY APPOINTING THE PETITIONER.

¶25

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDING OF THE WATER AUTHORITY REGULARIZING THE APPOINTMENT OF SMT. SANDHINI AS CHEMIST DATED 06.12.1999.

¶26

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER BEARING G.O(MS)NO. 260/69/FIN DATED 10.09.1969.

¶27

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF KERALA WATER AUTHORITY TECHNICAL SERVICE (SPECIAL) RULE 2013 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

¶28

EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE AUDIT REPORT 2004-2005.

¶29

EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO. KWA/JB/E7/6242/2012 DATED 22.05.2013 FROM MANAGING DIRECTOR TO EXECUTIVE ENGINEERS.

¶30

EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.09.2014 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF WATER AUTHORITY WITH NOTE FILE.

¶31

EXHIBIT P10(A): TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P10.

¶32

EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 06.12.2013 ISSUED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.W.A TO THE GOVT.

¶33

EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.07.2014 FROM THE GOVT. TO M.D, K.W.A.

¶34

WP(C).No. 27475 of 2014 (H)

¶35

EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE WATER AUTHORITY IN OCTOBER 2016.

¶36

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶42

W.P.(C) No.27475 of 2014

¶43

Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2017

¶44

J U D G M E N T

¶45

The issue raised in this writ petition is with regard to the appointment of the petitioner to the existing post of Bacteriologist under the 2^nd respondent-Kerala Water Authority. Petitioner challenges Ext.P12 order of the Government rejecting

¶46

the request for regularisation of her provisional appointment as Bacteriologist and seeks directions for such regularisation with retrospective effect from 02.06.2006 with all consequential benefits.

¶47

Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1^st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 4.

¶48

It is contended that the petitioner while working as L.D Typist under the 2^nd respondent was provisionally appointed as Bacteriologist in one of the nine posts sanctioned by the Government by Ext.P1 order with effect from 02.06.2006. Four

¶49

W.P.(C) No.27475/2014

¶50

¶51

more posts were later sanctioned but no regular appointments have been made. Ext.P2 draft rules were being acted upon at the time of petitioner's appointment. Petitioner had all the qualifications prescribed by Ext.P2. The method of appointment prescribed in Ext.P2 being by transfer from any other lower categories, it is contended that the appointment was perfectly in order. It is submitted that by Ext.P8, an audit conducted in the Kerala Water Authority had reported the absence of qualified Bacteriologists in the District Labs. The authority had also taken up the issue of regularisation of the petitioner as Bacteriologist as a special case and had sought executive orders in that regard from the Government. However, by Ext.P12, regularisation was denied, presumably for the reason that Ext.P7 revised draft rules provide that the method of appointment of Bacteriologist shall be by direct recruitment through Public Service Commission and by transfer through PSC in the ratio 4:1 and the petitioner, who was appointed by transfer without a selection conducted by Kerala Public Service Commission is not entitled to regularisation.

¶52

I have considered the contentions advanced. Petitioner was appointed by transfer to one of the sanctioned posts in the year 2006. Ext.P2 draft rules provided that the method of appointment would be by transfer. Petitioner has the

¶53

W.P.(C) No.27475/2014

¶54

¶55

qualification required for appointment. The 2^nd respondent had also requested her regularisation in service. This fact would go to show that the petitioner's service was satisfactory. Since petitioner had been appointed by transfer at a time when there was no requirement in place that such appointment should be by selection through PSC, I am of the opinion that her claims for regularisation should have been favourably considered by the Government in terms of the request made by the 2^nd respondent employer. This is more so because Ext.P7 rules on which reliance is placed in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1^st respondent are also draft rules and have not been notified.

¶56

In the result, Ext.P12 order is set aside. The 1^st respondent is directed to take up the requests made by the 2^nd respondent and to pass orders regularising the appointment of the petitioner as Bacteriologist under the 2^nd respondent with effect from 02.06.2006, if it is otherwise in order. Orders shall be passed, as directed above within a period of two months from the date of

¶57

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶58

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶59

Sd/-

¶60

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶61

smp

Chithra.R v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chithra.R v. the State of Kerala

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 Manager, Al-Syed L.P.School Vs State of Kerala & 2 Others

K.Anandarajan Vs Union of India

P.K.Sajeevan Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Suresh R.S. Vs State of Kerala

Sandya Vs the Director of Public Instructions & or

Magi Jacob Vs the Assistant Educational Officer