Aneesh v. the Secretary
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners challenging termination of extended contractual appointments sought regularisation in service. The Court held that repeated extensions do not create a right to permanency and dismissed the writ petition.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition is dismissed and no injunction quo warranto is issued.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY ,THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
W.P(C).No. 32744 of 2016
PETITIONERS:
1 ANEESH.S.K, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.SATHYANESAN,MELEPARAMBIL HOUSE,KANDAMTHITTA MAYAM POST,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695505.
- 2 SREEJESH.S, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.SREEKUMAR,INDIRA MANDIRAM,PATHIYOOR,KEERIKKAD POST,KAYAMKULAM,ALAPPUZHA,PIN-690508.
3 BINDU.K, AGED 44 YEARS D/O.RAMANEESAN ASARI,REVATHY,MYLEKONAM,KILLY,KOLLODU POST,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695571.
- 4 PURUSHOTHAMAN.V.V, AGED 40 YEARS S/O VASUDEVAN NAIR,VADAKKEYIL HOUSE,AKKAPARAMBA POST,KUZHIMANNA VIA,MALAPPURAM-673641.
- 5 MOHANAN.E.C(MAHESH.E.C.), AGED 28 YEARS S/O.CHAPPAN,EZHUVAITHIL HOUSE,POROOR,WAYANAND POST,THALAPPUZHA VIA,KATTIMOOLA,WAYANAD-670644.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether successive extension of a contract of service confers a right to regularisation or permanent appointment.
Whether the Government is bound to renew a contract of service upon a retired employee's recommendation.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Aneesh S.K.
- petitioner
Sreejesh S.
- petitioner
Bindu K.
- petitioner
Purushothaman V.V.
- petitioner
Mohan E.C.
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court