IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 15388 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SRI.K.VAIDEHI, W/O. BHUVANACHANDRAN, PART-TIME SWEEPER (DAILY WAGES) MUNROTHURUTHU GRAMA PANACHAYAT, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MUNROTHURUTHU GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY , MUNOROTHURUTHU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) FOR R1 SRI.P.SREEKUMAR FOR R1 MR.P.NANDAKUMAR, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/08/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.15388/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 12/08/2005 IN WA NO.1863/2004 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P2 : COPY OF G.O.(P) NO.501/2005/FIN. DATED 25/11/2005. P3 : COPY OF LETTER NO.6438/H2/06/LSGD DATED 08/05/2006 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. P4 : COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.E2-10032/04 DATED 16/1/2006 ISSUED BY R3. P4(a) : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 09/09/2005 IN WP(C) NO.29899/04/(H) AND CONNECTED CASES. P5 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 01/11/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3. P6 : COPY OF JUDGEMNT DATED 22/11/2006 IN WP(C) NO.30916/06 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P7 : COPY OF ORDER GO(Rt) NO.1327/2007/LSGD DATED 30/04/2007 ISSUED BY R2 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P8 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 14/01/2009 IN WP(C) NO.1416/2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.15388 of 2007 (F) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Claim of the petitioner for regularization in terms of the provisions contained in GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005 was rejected by Ext.P7 order dated 30/04/2007 on the ground that the benefit of the Government Order is not available to Part Time Sweepers engaged on daily wages. It is challenging Ext.P7 order that the writ petition has been filed. 2. Petitioner submits that she is working as a Part Time Sweeper on daily wages since 18/08/2005. It is stated that she submitted Ext.P5 representation claiming the benefit of regularization in terms of the provisions contained in GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005. When the representation was not considered, she approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.30916/2006. That writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P6 judgment dated 22/11/2006 directing consideration of her representation. Accordingly her representation was considered and WP(C) No.15388/2007 -2- Ext.P7 order was passed on 30/04/2007 rejecting her claim on the ground that she is a daily waged Part Time Sweeper. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the view taken in Ext.P7 order runs counter to the judgment of this Court in WP(C) Nos.19186/2005 & connected cases, where this Court held that GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005 applies to Sweepers appointed on daily wages also and the stand taken by the Government that daily waged employees are not entitled to regularization has been rejected. It is also submits that the said judgment has been followed by this Court in the judgment in WP(C) Nos.2724/2006 & connected cases, dated 26/06/2009. Learned counsel submits that in view of the directions issued in the judgment in WP(C) Nos.2724/2006 & connected cases, the Government have issued GO(Rt.) No.1566/10/LSGD dated 10/05/2010 regularising the services of the Part Time Sweepers engaged on daily wages. It is stated that for these reasons, the petitioner is entitled to parity in treatment and regularization of her services. 4. In the light of the judgments and the Government Order referred to above, I am satisfied that the view taken by the WP(C) No.15388/2007 -3- Government in Ext.P7 order is unsustainable. Therefore, I quash Ext.P7 order and direct the 2nd respondent to pass fresh orders on the claim of the petitioner for regularization, in terms of the provisions contained in GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005 duly adverting to the judgments and the Government Order referred to above. 5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copies of the judgments and Government Order referred to above before the 2nd respondent, who shall pass fresh orders on the claim of the petitioner for regularisation as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of copies of the judgments and the Government Order. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of interim order dated 18/05/2007, the petitioner continues to be engaged and paid wages as directed therein. It is also directed tht this shall be continued until the matter is finalized in the manner as directed above. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg