Dismissed

P.a.Narayanan v. the Government of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2018WP(C)/20325/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition filed by security guards employed by the Hospital Development Committee (HDC). The Court held it could not order payment of Government-fixed wages because the HDC is statutorily constrained to expend no more than 35% of its income on daily staff wages.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay wages at Government-fixed rates dismissed; Committee directed to review previous appointments to limit expenditure.

P.a.Narayanan Vs the Government of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 20325 of 2014

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1	P.A.NARAYANAN, PORUPUNCHA, NEAR C.N.I.L.P.S, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 001, (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
2	K.P.ALEXANDER, KALAPAKASSERIYIL, SOUTH KALLARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 611 (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
3	M.JOSEPH JOSE, MADAPPATTY HOUSE, (KANJIRAPPALIYIL), MEENADOM P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 516. (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
4	M.A.JOSE, THARAYATH, MEENADOM P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 516, (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
5	S.PRESANNAKUMAR, NEETHU BHAVAN, PERUNTHURUTH, P.O.KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 611, (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
6	M.M.KURIAN, MANIYAMKULATH, MOOLAMATTOM, P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 026 (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
7	N.K.PRABHAKRAN NAIR,SOUBHAGYA, KUMARANALLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN: 6786 016, (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
8	V.J.JAYAKUMAR, VALLIYIL HOUSE, ELAMPALLY P.O., ANICKAD, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 506, (WORKING AS SECURITY GUARD IN DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM)
	BY ADVS.SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

1.	THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (E) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695 001.
2.	THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695 001.
3.	THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 001.
4.	SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 001.
5.	HOSPITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 001.
	BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH
	THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

mbr/

¶11

WP(C).No. 20325 of 2014 (M)

¶12

APPENDIX

¶13

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶14

P1:	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.M.2-466/91/DHK DATED 6/4/1991.
P2:	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.30/05 DATED 22/8/2005 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
P3:	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.141/97/H AND FWD, DATED 25/4/1997.
P4:	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.P NO.307/2009/FIN. DATED 28/7/2009.
P5:	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.204/11/FIN DATED 2/5/2011.
P6:	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 30/8/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
P7:	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 4/9/1999 ISSUED BY THE HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT.

¶15

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

mbr/

06.03.2018.

P.V.ASHA, J.

W.P.(C) No.20325 of 2014

¶22

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2018

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioners are appointed as Security Guards in the District Hospital, Kottayam by the Hospital Development Committee. The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to pay the petitioners wages at the rates fixed by the Government.

¶25

At the time of filing of the writ petition they were paid at the rate of Rs.350/- per day. Similar Security Guards engaged on daily wages under the Government Departments are paid Rs.500/-.

¶26

The 4^th respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioners were appointed by the Hospital Development Committee purely on temporary basis as per Ext.P1 and similar orders stating the wages payable to them. On receipt of the representation of the petitioners, the sub committee headed by standing committee chairperson for health of the District Panchayat had studied the matter relating to the payment of wages to the temporary staff appointed by the Hospital Development Committee and it was found that it is not possible to pay wages to the staff more than 50% of the total monthly income of the Hospital Management Committee. The petitioners were paid wages at the rate of Rs.300/- per day from 1.4.2013 onwards as

¶27

W.P.(C) No.20325/14

¶28

:2:

¶29

per the Hospital Management Committee's decision taken on 1.2.2013 and it was increased to Rs.350/- per day as per Ext.P5. In Ext.P5 it was made clear that the wages at the rate of Rs.350/- was applicable only to full time workers and not to part time and casual employees. On the basis of the report submitted by the petitioners the Hospital Management Committee had taken a decision that the expenditure towards payment of wages to the daily staff should not exceed 35% of the total monthly income of the Hospital Management Committee and the payment of wages to the petitioners at a higher rate is not possible out of the monthly income which is generated by the Hospital Management Committee.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that as per the latest order issued by the Government in G.O(P) No.56/17/Fin. Dated 28.4.2017 daily wages admissible to Security Guards is Rs.710/- with a ceiling of Rs.19,850/- per month.

¶31

The learned Government Pleader points out that the wages as directed by the Government could not be admissible to those appointed by the Hospital Development Committee. Since the petitioners were appointed specifically their wages could be fixed by the Hospital Development Committee. According to the petitioners the Hospital Development Committee is unable to meet the expenditure

¶32

W.P.(C) No.20325/14

¶33

:3:

¶34

only because they made excess appointment. According to them appointments against vacancies which should have been filled up by the Government in the post of cleaning staff and other technical staff, were made by the Hospital Development Committee by reemployment of the persons, who retired from respective Hospitals.

¶35

At any rate I find that the Hospital Development Committee cannot make any payment in excess of 35% of the income generated by it and this income is generated by way of entry fees to the Hospital. Therefore the wages fixed in the Government order as claimed by the petitioners cannot be directed to be paid to the petitioners. At any rate, the Hospital Development Committee shall examine whether the appointments to the posts of cleaning staff and other technical staff are made in the absence of any requirement or in case those appointments should have been made by the Government and expenditure can be limited to the required posts, so that persons like petitioners who can be appointed by the committee alone would be able to draw wages in tune with the Government orders or at rates higher than what they are getting.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶38

rkc

P.a.Narayanan v. the Government of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.a.Narayanan v. the Government 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

Sr.Ranjana Vs Dr.K.M.Abraham

Sindhu T.R. Vs State of Kerala

T.A. Thankappan Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Kumar C. Vs Shinamol, Managing Director, Kerala Water Authority

Santhi G.Jaidev Vs Union of India

Subha M. Vs State of Kerala