IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2008 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 35815 of 2007(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SHYLAJA.S., PART-TIME SWEEPER, OFFICE OF THE CHILF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WELFARE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM. 3. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REVENUE (TP) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 35815 of 2007(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: G.O.(P).NO.501/05/FIN: DTD. 25.11.2005 EXT.P2: JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P.(C). NO.4201/2007 DTD.16.8.2007. EXT.P3: LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 15.11.2007. EXT.P4: JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P.(C). NO.15520/2006 DTD.26.7.2006. EXT.P5: ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNEMNT OF KERALA, DTD. 5.5.2006 REGULARIZING SERVICES OF CASUAL PART TIME SWEEPERS IN WATER SOURCES DEPARTMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL ....... // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. =============== W.P.(C).No.35815 of 2007 - L =============================== Dated this the 24th day of October, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as a casual sweeper in the Integrated Child Development Project Office at Sasthamkotta from 1.2.1996 onwards. She claims regularisation in service relying on Ext.P1 Government Order dated 25.11.2005. While the petitioner was working as casual sweeper in the Integrated Child Development Project Office at Sasthamkotta, by Ext.P3 letter dated 15.11.2007, the Director of Social Welfare directed the Project Officer, Sasthamkotta to take steps to recruit a part time sweeper through the employment exchange for regular appointment and to terminate the existing part time sweeper when the regular hand joins duty. This writ petition was thereupon filed challenging Ext.P3 and seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularise the petitioner in service. 2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit admitting the fact that the petitioner is working as casual W.P.(C).No.35815 of 2007 - L 2 sweeper in the Integrated Child Development Project Office at Sasthamkotta from 1.2.1996 onwards. They however contend that Ext.P1 Government Order contemplates regularisation of casual sweepers who are working against non sanctioned posts and in sanctioned posts only regular appointment can be made and that in sanctioned posts, regularisation is not contemplated by Ext.P1 Government Order. Yet another contention raised is that though a regular selection through the Employment Exchange was resorted to, that selection was set aside by this Court and the appointment of a regular sweeper was held up for that reason. 3. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on either side. The main objection raised by the respondents to the petitioner's request for regularisation is that Ext.P1 Government Order contemplates regularisation of part time casual sweeper in service after a post is created. In other words, the respondents contend that where ever there is an existing sanctioned post and casual sweepers are occupying such posts, regularisation cannot be made. In my W.P.(C).No.35815 of 2007 - L 3 considered opinion, there is no merit in the said contention. Paragraphs 2, 8 and 13 of Ext.P1 would indicate that if casual sweepers are working against sanctioned posts they are entitled to be regularised. But where no post exists, a post of part time contingent sweeper can be created if the sweeping area exceeds 100 square metre. In other words, the regularisation contemplated in Ext.P1 is not of casual sweeper working against non sanctioned posts alone as contended by the respondents. In the absence of a stipulation to the effect that only casual sweepers working against non sanctioned posts are entitled for regularisation, such a stipulation cannot be read into Ext.P1. The stand taken by the respondents cannot therefore be countenanced. I notice that a similar contentions raised in W.P. (C).No. 15520/2006 was rejected by Ext.P4 judgment. In Ext.P4 judgment, after noticing the fact that petitioner therein was working against a sanctioned post, this Court held that as the petitioner therein was working against a sanctioned post, no order creating the post need be issued and that what is required to be done is to pass an order regularising the petitioner. I W.P.(C).No.35815 of 2007 - L 4 therefore quash Ext.P3 and direct the respondents to take steps to regularise the petitioner in the existing post of part time sweeper in the Integrated Child Development Project Office at Sasthamkotta. Orders in that regard shall be passed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, the petitioner will also be entitled to all consequential benefits in terms of Ext.P1 Government Order and the pay revision orders issued from time to time. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-