Dismissed

Rajasree K.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Dec 2018WP(C)/22402/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a contract Accountant-Cum Data Entry Operator apprehending termination upon her contract expiry. The Court held that a contractee has no inherent right to continue after the contract period ends and dismissed the appeal against the Block Panchayat's decision to conduct fresh selection.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed, allowing the termination of the petitioner's service and the fresh selection process.

Rajasree K.K 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

WEDNESDAY,THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RAJASREE K.K AGED 42 YEARS ACCOUNTANT-CUM-DATA ENTRY OPERATOR,AREEKODE BLOCK PANCHAYATH,AREEKODE, MALAPPURAM.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ KUM.A.ARUNA KUM.THULASI K. RAJ SMT.RIYA RAYMOL IYPE SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER MISSION DIRECTOR MAHATHMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME, FIRST FLOOR, PUNARJANI,T.C 26/1333(2), PANAVILA JUNCTION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

3 AREEKODE BLOCK PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,AREEKODE, MALAPPURAM.

¶13

4 SECRETARY AREEKODE BLOCK PANCHAYAT,AREEKODE, MALAPPURAM.

¶14

5 THE BLOCK PROGRAMME OFFICER AREEKODE BLOCK PANCHAYAT,AREEKODE, MALAPPURAM.

¶15

6 ADDL.R6 RAJANI RAJAN EFMS DATA ENTRY OPERATOR, PMAYG, AREACODE BLOCK PANCHAYATH, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM - 673 639. (ADDL.R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 15/11/2018 IN IA.02/2018)

¶16

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 2

¶17

(CORRECTED) (THE NAME OF ADDL.R6 IS CORRECTED AS RAJITHA RAJAN AS PER ORDER DATED 23/11/2018 IN IA.03/2018)

¶18

BY ADVS. SRI.AASHIQUE AKTHAR HAJJIGOTHI SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL SMT.KEERTHANA J. RAMESH SMT.M.SHAJNA SRI.K.M.FIROZ SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ SR.GP.BIJOY CHANDRAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018

¶21

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The petitioner has been working as an Accountant-Cum Data Entry Operator in Areekode Block Panchayat. Her initial appointment was in the year 2008 on contract basis for a period of one year each. The petitioner filed this writ petition apprehending termination of service on expiry of contract period on 30.06.2018. The petitioner claims that her appointment was under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme(MGNREGS) and as the said scheme continues, she is entitled to continue as long as as the scheme continues. Apart from that she also claims that she is having sufficient experience on account of her service from 2008 onwards. However the respondent Block Panchayat initiated the proceedings for regular selection. Even though the petitioner submitted her application, the respondents submitted that she did not participate in the process of selection.

¶24

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 4

¶25

Relying on the judgment of the Apex Court

¶26

in State of Haryana and other V. Piara Singh and otherS 1992 (4) SCC 118, Barinder Kaur V. Gurunanak Dev University and others CWP No.6377/2014 (dated 09.07.2015) and Dr. Pramod Anandrao Pathre V. State of Maharashtra (2007) (109) Bombay LR 962, Muhammed Abdul Kadir V. DGP Assam (2009) 6 SCC 611), petitioner claims that she is not liable to be replaced by another contract employee.

¶27

In the counter affidavit filed by the 3^rd

¶28

respondent, it is stated that petitioner's appointments were purely on contract basis from year to year and petitioner had submitted Ext.P5

¶29

representation requesting for renewal of Contract from 01.07.2018. The Block Panchayat Committee which considered the same decided to conduct a fresh selection. It is stated that the last

¶30

appointment of the petitioner was for a period of 2 years from 01.07.2016 on the basis of Ext.P4 agreement executed by the petitioner with Block Panchayat. According to them complaints were received against petitioner and therefore the committee decided to conduct a fresh selection to

¶31

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 5

¶32

find out efficient and eligible person for

¶33

temporary engagement and therefore, it was decided to call for applications. It is also stated that a decision was taken on 27.07.2018 as per Ext.R3(a)

¶34

resolution to conduct the selection. It is also pointed out that as per Ext R3 (b) letter the Joint Programme Coordinator, Malapuram has

¶35

informed the respondent that prior sanction of Commissioner is not necessary for termination on expiry of contract period. It is stated that applications were called for from among qualified hands fixing the interview on 27.07.2018. The petitioner approached this Court immediately at the time of expiry of her contract and continue on the basis of interim order she did not participate

¶36

in the selection process, even though she submitted Ext.R3(c) application on 12.07.2018. The 3^rd respondent stated that out of 15 applications

¶37

received, the additional 6^th respondent was selected and appointed after conducting an

¶38

interview.

¶39

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 6

¶40

The additional 6^th respondent has entered

¶41

appearance. The learned Counsel appearing for the additional 6^th respondent points out that she is fully qualified for appointment to the post and she is having experience as Data Entry Operator. It is also pointed out that because of the Interim Order passed in this case and since petitioner is continuing on account of that, the additional 6^th respondent is unable to take charge.

¶42

The petitioner points out that she had

¶43

approached this Court in the year 2012 challenging termination of her service in W.P(C) No.3301 of 2012 and this Court as per Ext.P2 judgment disposed of the writ petition with a direction to consider her representation submitted before the

¶44

Rural Development Commissioner. It is stated that

¶45

as per Ext.P3 order dated 01.01.2014 the Commissioner had directed the Block Panchayat to review their decision to terminate her services and the petitioner thereafter, continued on the basis of subsequent agreements executed.

¶46

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 7

¶47

I have already considered similar cases including the judgment in W.P(c)No.13660 of 2018-F dated 19.11.2018. In the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the direction to the respondent in the aforesaid judgment. Petitioner who has been working on contract basis did not have any right to continue after 01.07.2018.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA

JUDGE

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018

¶52

¶53

APPENDIX

¶54

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶55

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 12.1.2012.	EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE 10.9.2013 IN WPC	JUDGMENT DATED NO. 3301/2012.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE PASSED BY THE 2ND	ORDER DATED 1.1.2014 RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 28.7.2016.	AGREEMENT NO.3/2016-17
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE 20.6.2018 SUBMITT BEFORE THE RESPOD	REPRESENTATION DATED ED BY THE PETITIONER NENTS 3 AND 4.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE 23.3.2018.	COMMUNICATION DATED
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE ISSUED BY THE 5TH	ORDER DATED 2.7.2018 RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE 1.11.2017 IN WA N	INTERIM ORDER DATED O. 1417/2017.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE 12.4.2018 IN WA N	INTERIM ORDER DATED O. 875/2018.

¶56

RESPONDENT/S'S EXHIBITS;

¶57

EXHIBIT R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE AREACODE BLOCK PANCHAYAT RESOLUTION NO.VIII(1) DATED 29.06.2018 EXHIBIT R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE JOINT PROGRAMME COORDINATOR, MALAPPURAM, NO.P5.2976/2018/MGNRGS TO THE BLOCK PROGRAMME OFFICER EXHIBIT R3(C) TRUE COPY OF THE THE APPLICATION DATED 12.07.2018. PREFERRED BY PETITIONER ALONG WITH ENCLOSED BIO DATA OF THE PETITIONER.

¶58

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2018 9

¶59

EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE INTERVIEW DATED 27.07.2018 EXHIBIT R3(e) TRUE COPY OF THE BLOCK PANCHAYAT GOVERNING BODY MEETING REGISTER DATED 04.08.2018

¶60

Rajasree K.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasree K.K 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Dayamon D Mathew Vs Kerala Veterinary & Animal Sciences

C.R. Subhash Chandra Bose Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

K.Ashok Kumar Vs Kerala Stae Council for Science

Suraj S, Vs State of Kerala

Malabar Cancer Centre Society Vs Sivadas P.P

Lineesh.a.K Vs the Kerala Gramin Bank