Disposed

Reshmi Remesh v. Kodumon Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC7 Mar 2018WP(C)/14972/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging fresh selection and non-rejoining, the respondent Panchayat requested alternate arrangements due to maternity leave. The court allowed the petitioner to rejoin duty on 1.4.2018 at the Panchayat's convenience, continuing the existing arrangement till the end of the financial year.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of; petitioner allowed to rejoin duty from 1.4.2018, with existing arrangement continuing till 31.3.2018.

Reshmi Remesh Vs Kodumon Grama Panchayath — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 14972 of 2017

¶6

PETITIONER(S)

¶7

RESHMI REMESH AGED 30 YEARS, W/O. VINEESH V. RESHMI BHAVAN, ANGADICKAL NORTH PO., KAIPATOOR VIA PATHANAMTHITTA PIN-689648

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE

SMT.P.V.PARVATHI

SMT.REENA THOMAS

RESPONDENT(S):

1. KODUMON GRAMA PANCHAYATH KODUMON PO., PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-691555

¶13

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶14

2. SECRETARY KODUMON GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KODUMON PO., PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-691555

¶15

3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURA PIN-695001

¶16

R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)

¶17

R1,R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.R.DILEEP

¶18

R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RON BASTIAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.03.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

RKC

¶21

WP(C).No. 14972 of 2017

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' --------------	EXHIBITS --------
EXHIBIT P1:	COPY OF THE AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER DATE 01.04.2015
EXHIBIT P2:	COPY OF THE FRESH AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER ON 1.04.2016
EXHIBIT P3:	COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO.756/2017/LSGD DATED 18.3.2017
EXHIBIT P4:	COPY OF THE AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER ON 1/04/2017
EXHIBIT P5:	COPY OF THE RELIEVING LETTER DATED 24.04.2017 ISSUED TO PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P5(A)	COPY OF RESOLUTION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21.04.2017
EXHIBIT P6:	COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.24.04.2017 REGARDING PUBLICATION
EXHIBIT P7:	COPY OF THE REQUEST DT.1.2.18 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8:	COPY OF THE DECISION DT.29.1.18 OF THE PANCHAYAT
RESPONDENT(S)' --------------	EXHIBITS ---------
EXHIBIT R1(A):	A TRUE COPY OF GO(ORD.) NO.1772/2012 LSGD DATED 27.6.2012
EXHIBIT R1(B):	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT R1(C):	A TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 5.1.2018 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS.

RKC

TRUE COPY

PA TO JUDGE

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P.(C) No.14972 of 2017

¶29

Dated this the 7^th day of March, 2018

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant in the 1^st respondent Panchayat on the basis of Ext.R1(a) Scheme, by which Government permitted the Panchayats to appoint Technical Assistants in all the Panchayts in the State. The petitioner was appointed in the year 2015. The petitioner who is a qualified hand with B.Com and PGDCA was appointed in the 1^st respondent Panchayat after executing Ext.P1 agreement on 1.4.2015. The petitioner submits that the tenure of her appointment was renewed for a further period of one year as per Ext.P2 agreement and it was again renewed for a period till 31.3.2018 based on Ext.P3 Government order.

¶32

While so, the 1^st respondent Panchayat resolved to conduct a fresh selection as per Ext.P5 letter. Petitioner filed this writ petition at that stage challenging Ext.P5 letter for fresh selection. When the writ petition came up for consideration on 2.5.2017, an interim order was passed allowing the petitioner to continue as Technical Assistant and directing the respondents not to make any fresh appointment to the post by way of temporary hands. While petitioner was continuing on the basis of the interim orders, the 1^st respondent filed I.A.No.13390/ 2017 pointing out that the petitioner was going on maternity leave for

¶33

W.P.(C) No.14972/17

¶34

:2:

¶35

a period of six months. The 1^st respondent pointed out that it will be difficult for the Panchayat without the services of a Technical Assistant. Therefore this Court as per order dated 22.8.2017 allowed the 1^st respondent to take appropriate proceedings for alternate arrangement.

¶36

The petitioner has now filed a petition IA.No.3655 of 2018 pointing out that the petitioner is not being allowed to rejoin duty since the 1^st respondent informed her that on the basis of the permission granted by this Court another person has already been appointed and she has to be allowed to continue till 31.3.2018.

¶37

Even though respondents filed a counter affidavit pointing out that the appointment of the petitioner was for a period of one year and the respondent Panchayat had got every right to select and to decide the person who is to work as Technical Assistant under them, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that even on 27.2.2018 Government have issued orders directing retention of the existing Technical Assistants working in the Panchayaths. The petitioner has been continuing on the basis of Ext.P3 order of Government by which similar extension was directed. Now in the light of G.O(Rt) No.571/18/LSGD dated 27.2.2018 the petitioner can continue for the period up to 31.3.2019.

¶38

W.P.(C) No.14972/17

¶39

:3:

¶40

However I find that the Panchayat would be having sufficient work to complete by the end of the financial year that is by 31.3.2018. Therefore in the interest of the Panchayat it would be better to continue the present arrangement till 31.3.2018. The petitioner shall be allowed to rejoin duty with effect from 1.4.2018 subject to other conditions based on which she was being allowed to continue.

¶41

Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of.

¶42

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶43

rkc

Reshmi Remesh v. Kodumon Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reshmi Remesh v. Kodumon Grama Panchayath

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

M.G.Ganapathy Embrandhiri Vs v.a.Sheeja

Seenath P Vs Lathi Nair

Aradhana.R Vs Travancore Devaswom Board

Jeena George Vs State of Kerala

K.D.Joseph Vs Union of India

Ampilly L. Vs Director of Social Justice