Allowed

R.Sasidharan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Sept 2018WP(C)/1437/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the denial of regularisation for a part-time sweeper. The Court observed that the sweeping area had increased beyond 900 sq.mtrs, satisfying the Government Order requirements. It directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation for regularisation and pass consequential orders within stipulated timelines.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 4th respondent to forward the petitioner's representation and resolution for regularisation within two months, and the 1st respondent to consider the proposal within a further two mon

R.Sasidharan Pillai Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 07TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 16TH BHADRA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 1437 of 2015

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

R.SASIDHARAN PILLAI AGED 50 YEARS

¶8

S/O.LATE RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, PART-TIME SWEEPER (ON DAILY WAGES), MYNAGAPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MYNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI. M.V. THAMBAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

¶12

2 THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶14

4 MYNAGAPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH MYNAGAPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 690 519.

¶15

5 THE SECRETARY MYNAGAPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MYNAGAPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690 519.

¶16

SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NIMA JACOB SRI. K. SIJU

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).No. 1437 of 2015

¶19

¶20

P.V.ASHA, J.

¶21

W.P.(C) No.1437 of 2015

¶22

Dated this the 7^th day of September, 2018

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioner has been working as Part Time Sweeper in the 4^th respondent Panchayat-Mynagappilly Grama Panchayat from 17.08.2001 onwards. He is aggrieved by the denial of regularisation as Part Time Sweeper. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 04.01.2015 in which it is stated that the sweeping area is more than 900 sq. mtrs. and therefore there is scope for his regularization.

¶25

2. The 3^rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that at the time of appointment of the petitioner in 2001 sweeping area of the Panchayat Office was only 687 sq.mtrs and that one Smt.Chellamma was regularised as Part Time Sweeper with effect from 17.08.2001 in tune with the directions in the judgment in OP.No.13774/1998. It is also stated that the sweeping area of the Grama Panchayat office has been enhanced to above 900 sq.matrs in the year 2005 and thereafter adjoining rooms were constructed and total sweeping area of the Grama Panchayat has been increased to 1000.34 sq.mtrs as on 28.10.2003.

¶26

3. It is seen that the petitioner's request for regularization was initially rejected on the ground that the total sweeping area was only less than 800 sq.mtrs. In view of the fact that the sweeping

¶27

¶28

WP(C).No. 1437 of 2015

¶29

area has been increased to more than 900 sq.mtrs., there is no reason for not considering the case of the petitioner. Regularization of Smt.Chellamma at the time when sweeping area was only 687 sq.mtrs cannot stand in the way of the consideration of the case of the petitioner for regularisation when the sweeping area has been enhanced to 900 sq.mtrs and above in the year 2005 itself. Clause 15 of G.O.(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25.11.2005 (Ext.P1) provided that if the sweeping area is above 800 sq.mtrs but below 900 sq.mtrs a part-time contingent sweeper and a casual sweeper will be engaged. If it is above 900 sq.mtrs., 2 part-time contingent sweepers can be engaged. It further provides that the matter is to be taken up with Government in the proforma given in Appendix along with the certificate from the concerned Engineer of the Public Works Department. The concerned Department would thereafter issue orders to create the posts in consultation with the Finance Department.

¶30

In the above circumstances, there shall be a direction to the 4^th respondent to forward Ext.P3 representation of the petitioner along with the resolution of the Panchayat for his regularisation in tune with Ext.P1 Government order along with all requisite documents within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. There shall be a further direction to the 1^st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner along with the proposal for regularization of the petitioner which would

¶31

WP(C).No. 1437 of 2015 4

¶32

be submitted by the 4^th respondent, within a further period of two months. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits based on the regularisation in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the Panchayat submits that the Panchayat has already forwarded the proposal along with all the documents. At any rate, the Panchayat shall intimate the details of such resolution forwarded by them along with a copy of this judgment, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. In that even the 1^st respondent shall consider the said proposal and pass orders on the same and communicate the same to the petitioner also, within a period of three months of the receipt of such intimation from the Panchayat without waiting for a fresh proposal.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

rkc

WP(C).No. 1437 of 2015

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P)NO.501/2005/FIN DATED 25.11.2005. EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.07.2008 IN W.P(C)NO.3326/2007. EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.01.2015 OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.6438/H2/06/LSGD DATED 06.05.2006. EXHIBIT P5 EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.01.2009 IN W.P(C)NO.1416/2008. EXHIBIT P6 EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.4.11.2014 IN TA NO.2573/12 (WP. NO.6556/2007 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA) OF THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL.

¶41

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶42

RKC

R.Sasidharan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sasidharan Pillai v. State of Kerala

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

Unnikrishnan.T Vs Dr. K. Krishnakumari

C.Vasanthy Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises

O.Padmanabhan Nambiar Vs Chief Manager

Dr. Krishna Kumar M Vs Dr. M.K. Mangalam

Ex-Servicemen Industrial Guards Pvt.Ltd Vs the Employees Provident Fund Organisation

Indu V.G Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board