IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 4077 of 2008 (I) -------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. LAILA T.M. LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. PUDUPPARIYARAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. E.ABDUL RAHMAN, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. SREEKRISHNAPURAM PALAKKAD DIST. 3. PADMINI V, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. POOK0TTUKAVAU, PALAKKAD DIST. 4. P.SIVA NARAYANAN, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. THRIKKADEERI 5. P.C.NADRAJAN, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. VADAKKANCHERRY PALAKKAD. 6. K.V.SARASWATHY, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. KOGHAD, PALAKKAD DIST. 7. K.HARIDAS, LEPROSY INSPECTOR, P.H.C. CHERUPULASSERRY PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER , SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 4077 of 2008 (I) APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBIT EXT.P1. COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.275/06 H & FWD DATED 29.12.2006. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL P.S. TO JUDGE / TRUE COPY / VK S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 4077 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners were originally appointed as provisional Leprosy Inspectors in the Health Service Department. Subsequently by Ext.P1 order dated 29.12.2006, they were given regular appointment, on specific conditions mentioned therein, which included a condition that, past services would not be counted for any service benefits including pension. Pursuant to Ext.P1, petitioners entered regular service. After an year, they have filed this writ petition on 31.01.2008, challenging the condition in Ext.P1 order that their past service would not be counted for any service benefits including pension. According to the petitioners, the delay in giving them regular appointment is not because of any fault of the petitioners and therefore they cannot be denied the benefit of their prior provisional service. W.P.(C)No. 4077 of 2008 -2- I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. Ext.P1 order is dated 29.12.2006. The petitioners accepted the Ext.P1 order knowing fully well the conditions therein. At that time they did not choose to challenge the condition in Ext.P1. Thereafter, after one year they have filed this writ petition challenging the condition in Ext.P1. They have not been able to satisfy me that, they had a right to be regularized in service. Therefore Ext.P1 order was only a concession. It is also stated therein that the regularization is effected only with prospective effect. They can take the concession with the conditions attached thereto or leave it. They cannot after accepting Ext.P1, turn around and challenge the conditions on which they were appointed in regular service. Therefore there is no merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/