IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 22891 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAJESH KUMAR M., S/O.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, AGED 29 YEARS, "RAJESH BHAVAN", ARUKIL KUTTICHAL P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ANOOJA A., W/O.MURALI, AGED 28 YEARS, AMBALAYA, KUTTICHAL P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHIJI S.A., D/O.V.AYYAPPAN PILLAI, MADHAVA VILASAM, VALIYAKULANGU, PARANODE P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SHERLY V.R., D/O.RATNARAJ, "USHUS", NELLIVILA, KUNNATHUKAL P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, PIN-695 504. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO AGRICULTURE (AH) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. 3. DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM. 4. JITHA JAKKULIN S.S., KATTUMURAKKAL HOUSE, KOONTHALLOOR, CHIRAYINKEEZH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 5. ARUN A, KUNNUVILA VEEDU, MELATTINGAL, ALAMCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. WP(C).No. 22891 of 2009 -2- 6. SUNI P., PANNIYARAKONAM ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, PEZHUMOODU, KUTTICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. SHIJIMOL V.S., NELLAKANDANVILA VEEDU, CHENKAL, VATTAVILA P.O., PIN-695132. 8. MUHAMMAD FASILUDEEN A., T.C.35/764/2, ATTARIKIL VEEDU, PUTHENPALAM, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. AZEEM S.T., MUBARAK MANZIL, VATTAKULAM, ARUVIKKARA P.O. 10. NAJEEMA A., ONAMCODE VADAKKUMKARA, PUTHEN VEEDU, PUNALAL P.O., NEDUMANGAD. 11. ANAS B.S., ABR HOUSE, PUTHUKULANGARA P.O NEDUMANGAD. 12. SREELATHA S., TC 13/588(1), R.C.JUNCTION, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 13. RESHMI V., T.C.50/1252, NARAYANA MANDIRAM, KALADY, THALIYAL, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 14. PARVATHY MOHAN, T.C.30/754, PETTAH P.O., THIRUVNANTHAPURAM. 15. DEEPIKA NAIR P., KONATHMELE LALU BHAVAN, PAKALOOR, PALLICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 16. BOSCO EUGINE FERNANDEZ, SWAGATH BHAVAN, EDAVILAKOM, MURUKKUMPUZHA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 17. SHAINU S., PUTHEN VEEDU, THENNIKONAM, ALTHARAMOODU P.O., ALTHARAMOODU-695 102. 18. P.ANUSUTHAN, PRANAVAM, KUNNUVARAM, ATTINGAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 19. MANJU S., ,MANOJ NIVAS, AMBALATHINKALA, AMBALTHINKALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 20. SHAINY N., SALINIMANDIRAM, PALAIKKONAM, ARYANADU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 21. MUHAMMED SHAJEEB E., SHAJILA MANZIL, UNDAPPARA, POOVACHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 22891 of 2009 -3- 22. REENA SHINE T.V., VETTUVILA VEEDU, KEEZHKOLLA, AMARAVILA P.O., PIN 695 122. 23. SRIPRIYA S., THEKKE KUNDOOR VEEDU, EITHUKONDANKANI, AMARAVILA P.O. 24. REMYA T.R., NILAMA MARUTHUMMOODU VEEDU, KUTTICHAL, KUTTICHAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 25. REKHA NATH P.R., REVATHU, ATHIYANOOR, ARALUMMOODU P.O., PIN-695 123. 26. KISHOR M.L., "KISHOBHAVAN", BOUNDERMUKKU, PARANDODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 27. SAJU KUMAR S.S., CHADAYAM VILAKATHU PUTHENVEEDU, KEEZHAMMAKOM, CHENKAL P.O., PIN 695 132. BY GP ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).22891/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners who claim to be qualified to be appointed as Live Stock Inspectors in Government service are aggrieved by the temporary appointment of respondents 4 to 26 as Live Stock Inspector Grade-II. It is contended that qualification required for the post is VHSE (Live Stock Management) and a certificate evidencing six months training. It is also contended that the appointees have not undergone training for six months and that the petitioners who have been registered with the Employment Exchange, Thiruvananthapuram, are otherwise qualified since they have undergone training. But nevertheless they have been overlooked and ineligible persons have been appointed. Ext.P5 order by which respondents 4 to 26 have been appointed on a provisional basis for a period of one year is challenged in the writ petition. 2. I heard learned Government Pleader also. In my view, it is appropriate that the allegations be looked into by the 2nd respondent, the Director of Animal Husbandry Department. W.P.(C).22891/09 2 3. In the result, petitioners may file a representation detailing the above aspects before the 2nd respondent within two weeks from today, along with the copy of the judgment and a copy of the writ petition. There upon, the 2nd respondent shall look into the allegations and see that only qualified hands are appointed as Live Stock Inspector Grade- II in the Department of Animal Husbandry. If anyone among the present appointees are found to be ineligible and unqualified, action to terminate their services shall be taken only after notice to them. At any rate, decision on the representation to be filed by the petitioners shall be taken within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs