Disposed

Nicy George v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Sept 2020WP(C)/18453/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning appointment as an Anganwadi Worker, the Court ordered the 2nd respondent to expedite the disposal of the petitioner's representation with an opportunity to be heard, forbidding further permanent appointments until that decision is taken.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation within three weeks after providing a hearing to the petitioner and have the petitioner represented physically or via video conferencing.

Nicy George Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 18TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.18453 OF 2020(F)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

NICY GEORGE

¶8

D/O. PONNAMMA, NIKSON BHAVAN, EDAKKATTU P.O., EDAKKATTU, PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM DISTRICT,PIN-690 520, NOW RESIDING AT KANNAKARAVILLA VEEDU, PERUVELIKARA P.O., SASTHAMKOTTA VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 502

¶9

BY ADVS. SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA SRI.R.RENJITH

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, SOCIAL JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001

¶12

2 THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, ICDS OFFICE, SASTHAMKOTTA, PORUVAZHY (P.O), KOLLAM DIST, PIN-690 520

¶13

3 THE DISTRICT OFFICER, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM,PIN-691 001

¶14

4 PORUVAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT REP BY ITS SECRETARY, PORUVAZHY, PORUVAZHY (PO), KOLLAM DIST, PIN-690 520

¶15

SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN G.P

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.18453 OF 2020 2

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner has approached this Court

¶20

claiming that she is entitled to be appointed

¶21

as an Anganwadi Worker but that the 2^nd respondent is refusing to appoint her without any justifiable cause. She says that she has, therefore, preferred Ext.P10 representation before the 2^nd respondent and that she has done so in the light of Ext.P8 Government Order which clearly entitle her to the claim she is now making. She, therefore, prays that the 2^nd respondent be directed to take up Ext.P10 representation and dispose it of in the light of Ext.P8 Government Order; and that, in the meanwhile, he be directed not to appoint any Anganwadi Worker on permanent basis in Center No.47 in the Poruvazhy Grama Panchayat Area.

¶22

Shri.Bijoy Chandran, learned Senior

¶23

Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents, submitted that there is no legal impediment in Ext.P10 representation being taken up and disposed of, but prayed

¶24

WP(C).No.18453 OF 2020 3

¶25

that this Court may not make any affirmative declaration as to the entitlement of the petitioner to any relief and leave it to be decided by the competent Authority, in terms law.

¶26

Taking note of the afore submissions, I am of the firm view that it is not necessary to keep this writ petition pending on the files of this Court any further, since the 2^nd respondent has now agreed to dispose of

¶27

Ext.P10 representation, which will then decide the entitlement of the petitioner as per the applicable Rules and Regulations.

¶28

In the result, I order this writ petition and direct the 2^nd respondent to take up Ext.P10 representation and to dispose of the same, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner - either physically or through video conferencing - and after adverting to Ext.P8 Government Order; thus leading to an appropriate proceedings thereon,

¶29

WP(C).No.18453 OF 2020 4

¶30

as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶31

Needless to say, until such time as the 2^nd respondent issues the proceedings on Ext.P10 in terms of this judgment, no appointment on a permanent basis to the post of Anganwadi Worker in Center No.47 in Poruvazhy Grama Panchayat will be permitted by the 2^nd respondent; and any appointment already made will be subject to the decision to be taken by him in terms of this judgment.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

MC/11.9.2020

¶36

WP(C).No.18453 OF 2020 5

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPIES OF THE THE 2ND RESPONDENT	CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 20	RELEVANT PAGES OF THE .7.2015
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE THE VILLAGE OFFICE	TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY PORUVAZHY DATED 6.8.2019
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE 6.8.2019	LOCATION MAP DATED
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 6.8.2019	LOCATION CERTIFICATE
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE ACCOUNT ON THE FIL	RELEVANT PAGE THANDAPER ES OF PORUVAZHY VILLAGE
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE PRESENT STATUS OF	PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE THE ANGANAVADY
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE NO.85/2013 SOCIAL 19.10.2013	GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O(MS) JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DATED
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL	COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY SERVICE DATED 14.5.2015
EXHIBIT P10 RESPONDENT'S/S E NIL	A TRUE COPY OF THE 10.8.2020 XHIBITS:	REPRESENTATION DATED

¶40

MC (TRUE COPY) PA TO JUDGE

Nicy George v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nicy George v. the State 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

Arjuna M., Vs the Director

Vinu Paul Vs the State of Kerala

Ashik K. Moosa, Vs the Director

K.R.Sunil Dutt Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Shamseer M.F. Vs Kerala Water Authority

Lakshmi Sunil Vs the Chairman