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. 6027 of 2007(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VASUMATHI M., D/O.M.KUNHIRAMAN, MAKKUNIYIL HOUSE, P.O. CHAMPAD, VIA.PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR DIST. (FORMERLY WORKED AS PART TIME CASUAL SWEEPER AT TALUK OFFICE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT) BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, THALASSERY. MR.P.NANDAKUMAR, 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.6027/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1. P2 : COPY OF GO(P) NO.501/2005 DATED 25/11/2005. P3 : COPY OF REPLY DATED 14/08/2006. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.6027 of 2007 (P) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that she was working as Part Time Sweeper in Taluk Office, Thalassery from 23/07/2001 till August, 2004. She claims regularisation of her service in terms of paragraph 10 of GO (P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2. 2. However, a statement, which has been filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent as directed by this Court, shows that there is a sanctioned post of Full Time Sweeper in Taluk Office, Thalassery and a person is also appointed against that post. It is stated that when the Full Time Sweeper was transferred to another place for a short period, the petitioner was engaged and now the Full Time Sweeper is discharging his duties at Taluk Office, Thalassery. Therefore, it is evident that the engagement of the petitioner as Part Time Sweeper is not covered by GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25/11/2005 and will not entitle her to claim the benefit of regularisation as contemplated therein. Therefore, I am not WP(C) No.6027/2007 -2- persuaded to direct consideration of her claim. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg