Dismissed

Thara N., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Oct 2021WP(C)/9377/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought regularisation of contractual service as a typist at the Kerala Forest Research Institute. The petition was dismissed by a Single Judge and a Division Bench due to lack of direct employment, ineligibility, and a prior decision. The High Court held that re-raising the same issue constitutes an abuse of process and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the writ petition failed and was dismissed.

Thara N., Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 15TH ASWINA, 1943

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.9377 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THARA N.,

¶8

AGED 43 YEARS, W/O. DILEEP, CHIRAPPURATH (H), MANAKKAPPADAM, THRISSUR.

¶9

BY ADV N.KRISHNA PRASAD (PALKULANGARA)

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶12

REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

2 THE DIRECTOR,

¶14

THE KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI,

¶15

PEECHI (P.O.), THRISSUR-690 653.

¶16

R1 SRI.V.VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶17

R2 SRI.P.C SASIDHARAN,STANDING COUNSEL

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

W.P.(C) NO.9377 OF 2021

¶20

-2-

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

The petitioner herein, who claims to have been given a contractual appointment, has approached this Court for regularisation of her service. She had worked as typist for more than 10 years. Pursuant to the direction of this Court, the Director of Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI) has passed Ext.P8 order. Aggrieved by the above, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶23

The learned counsel for the respondents invited my attention to Ext.P2 judgment which was at the instance of the petitioner herein challenging the refusal to regularise. The learned Single Judge held that the petitioner was not directly employed under the 2^nd respondent herein and that there was no post of typist under them, after Special Rules was adopted. It was also found that she is not qualified to hold the post of typist. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed. The Division Bench had held that the petitioner who had been working on daily wage basis was not entitled for regularisation. It was also held that even otherwise she was engaged for various projects undertaken by the project co-ordinators and was not directly employed by the respondent

¶24

W.P.(C) NO.9377 OF 2021

¶25

-3-

¶26

Company. She did not possess the requisite qualification required for a sanctioned post. Having considered these facts, the Division Bench dismissed the writ appeal confirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge. After having suffered the dismissal, the petitioner has approached this Court raising up the same issue again which is nothing short of abuse of process of law. Hence, I am not inclined to grant any relief.

¶27

In the above circumstances, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.

¶28

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE

¶29

bpr

¶30

W.P.(C) NO.9377 OF 2021

¶31

-4-

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶34

EXHIBIT P1	COPY OF ORDER NO.35/KFRI/ESTT/1991 DATED 19.8.2018.
EXHIBIT P2	COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 15.9.2020 IN WP(C) NO.5489 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P3	COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 4.12.2020 IN WA NO.1583 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P4	COPY OF ORDER NO.12-2986/2020 DATED 4.1.2021 OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, KERALA.
EXHIBIT P5	COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONER DATED 3.3.2021.
EXHIBIT P6	COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.2.2021 IN WP(C) NO.3956/2021.
EXHIBIT P7	COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.5526/2014 DATED 11.3.2014.
EXHIBIT P8	COPY OF ORDER NO.G114/KFRI/ESTT/20036 DATED 4.6.2014.

Thara N., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thara N., 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jacob Varghese, Vs State of Kerala

Akhil Das a Vs State of Kerala

Asha Jose Vs State of Kerala

Sam.K.Julius, Vs Shipping Corporation of India Ltd.

Nikhila O.K. Vs the Kadambur Grama Panchayath

Deepesh V.K Vs Biju Prabhakara IAS