IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 36470 of 2003(N) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.M.KUTTAPPAN, S/O. MADHAVAN, AGED 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT VALIYA THAYYIL HOUSE, AMBIKA MARKET P.O., VAIKOM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.A.X.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MECHANICAL DIVISION, ALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADERMR.T.K.VIPINDAS FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C) BNO.36470/2003 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF CONVERSION OF THE SAID PERSONS FROM C..R. WORKERS INTO N.M.R. PASSED BY THE P.W.D. DT. 3.7.71. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 6.4.95 IN OP. 5890/95 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE TSS K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 36470 OF 2003-N ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st April,2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court claiming regularisation of past service with effect from 1.4.1971. The petitioner claims that he had entered service in 1996 as a casual labourer (CLR worker) on temporary service in the Thanneer Mukkam Project Division under the third respondent. According to him he had worked continuously thereafter but he was not regularised though persons similarly placed were regularised as per Ext.P1 G.O. Subsequently, he has been regularised but, only with effect from 17.6.1995. In view of the above he claims regularisation with effect from 1.4.1971. He had earlier approached this Court by filing O.P.5890/95 alleging that his application for regularisation was not considered by the authorities. As per Ext.P2 judgment this Court had directed the State to consider his claim expeditiously. It is pursuant to the said direction that his services have been regularised. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has since retired from service as a Class IV employee. WPC 36470/2003 2 2. The claim of the petitioner is opposed by the respondents. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent, it is contended that the service of the petitioner was not continuous. He had only broken periods of service totalling 865 days. He was eligible for absorption into regular service only with effect from 17.6.1995. According to the second respondent, the persons in Ext.P1 were workers who had been engaged continuously and it was for the said reason that they were absorbed as SLR workers with effect from 1.4.1971. On the basis of the availability of vacancies they were further absorbed as NMR workers. The second respondent has further averred that the criteria adopted for absorption of such persons was, the number of continuous working days put it by a person, the requirement and availability of vacancies, seniority etc. Since the petitioner did not satisfy any of the above criteria, his claim could not be allowed. Therefore, he was regularised only with effect from 17.6.1995, which is perfectly in order. 3. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner as well as the Govt. Pleader. 4. It is seen from Ext.P1 that the persons named therein are CLR workers who have been brought into NMR service with effect WPC 36470/2003 3 from 1.4.1971. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was similarly situated as the persons named in the said order. According to the counter affidavit, the claim of the petitioner was considered on the basis of various criteria and he was regularised with effect from 17.6.1995. The criteria adopted cannot be termed as unreasonable. The petitioner has since retired from service after being regularised as a Class IV worker. The petitioner has not been able to show that he has any right to get regularisation with effect from 1.4.1971. In view of the above, the claim of the petitioner fails. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. No costs. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 36470/2003 4 K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: