IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 6239 of 2009(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. UNNIMALU.M.K, W/O.ROY.P.J, PART TIME SWEEPER, GOVERNMENT HOMEO DISPENSARY, MOOKKANNOOR.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. AMMINI.M.K, W/O.KUTTAPPAN, MANIYATTILE, MOOKKANNOOR.PO,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE HOMOEO MEDICAL OFFICER,GOVERNMENT BOMOEO DISPENSARY, MOOKKANNOOR, ERNAKULAM DIST. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER(HOMOEO), KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF HOMOEOPATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.6239 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 26th February,2009 J U D G M E N T First petitioner is working as Part-time Sweeper in the office of the 1st respondent. Second petitioner is the mother of the 1st petitioner. First petitioner originally joined in the office of the 1strespondent on 1.4.2003. According to the petitioner, she has also been utilised for performing other miscellaneous work and was paid only a consolidated amount of Rs.600/- which was enhanced to Rs.750/- per month and then to Rs.1000/- per month. 2. The sweeping area of the office is more than 100 M2. It is further contended that the 2nd petitioner's name was also used to be entered into the register by the authorities intermittently to avoid continuity of the 1st petitioner in service. But actually the 1st petitioner alone was working there and was receiving the wages. It is also submitted that from April 2003 onwards the 1st petitioner is working continuously and is receiving W.P ( C) No.6239 of 2009 2 wages. But in spite of the fact that the sweeping area is more than 100 M2, she is being paid only fixed remuneration. 3. The petitioner is relying upon Exhibit-P1 G.O (P) No.501/2005/Fin. Dated 25.11.2005 to contend that she is entitled for regularisation as per the scheme provided therein. The scheme was framed pursuant to the judgment of this Court in Mercy Vs. State of Kerala [2004 (2) KLT 848] 4. It is pointed out that no steps have been taken to comply with the scheme provided in Exhibit-P1 for creating a post and to regularise the part-time sweeper working in the office as on the date of the said Government Order. Various procedures have been formulated in Exhibit-P1 for the said purpose. 5. First petitioner has filed Exhibit-P2 representation before the Government seeking for appropriate orders to regularise her in service in accordance with Exhibit-P1 Government Order. W.P ( C) No.6239 of 2009 3 6. Hence there will be a direction to the 4th respondent to consider Exhibit-P2 and take appropriate action in accordance with the scheme provided in Exhibit- P1 for granting regularisation and other benefits to the 1st petitioner herein. Appropriate action shall be taken to call for the sweeping area certificate and other details along with recommendation from respondents 1 to 3. Final orders shall be passed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the 4th respondent, for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.6239 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No.6239 of 2009 5