IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 WA.No. 1613 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.964/2010 Dated 09/09/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS 1 ,2 ------------------------------ 1. SREEJITH N.V. S/O.KUNJAMBU NAIR, VAYAL VEETTIL HOUSE, ATHIYADAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. SANEESH K.K, 'SOPANAM',KUNNOTH,KILIYANTHARA PO, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.BABY SRI.A.N.SANTHOSH RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- THE INSTITUTE OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PRAJOE TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. ADV. SHRI M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,IHRD THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.3.2011 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.1616/2010 AND CONNECTED CASES. THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. BASHEER & P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------------- W.A.Nos.1613, 1616, 1620, 1638, 1639, 1640, 1712, 1857 of 2010, 41 of 2011 & WP(C) No. 2115 of 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT A.K. Basheer, J. All these cases are being disposed of through this common judgment without considering their respective merit in view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at the bar. 2. The issue relates to the claim made by the appellants for their re-induction/regularization in service in the Institute of Human Resources Development (herein after referred to as 'the Institute'). 3. Some of the similarly placed candidates who were engaged on a provisional basis have already been re- inducted/regularized by the Institute considering the long and continuous service rendered by them for five years or more. The Institute has passed orders of appointment in the case of those six employees on an adhoc basis and on a consolidated monthly pay of Rs.6,000/-. The Institute took the view that since W.A.Nos.1613, 1616, 1620, 1638, 1639, 1640, 1712, 1857 of 2010, 41 of 2011 & WP(C) No. 2115 of 2010 2 these employees had put in service of 5 years or more as on November 14, 2006, thus would be eligible to continue in service albeit on an adhoc basis. Those who had been terminated from service were allowed to rejoin duty. They have already accepted the terms of appointment and joined duty. 4. Learned standing counsel submits that the Institute is prepared to apply the same yard stick in the case of the appellants also if there are any to be still absorbed or re- inducted. In other words, according to the learned standing counsel, the Institute will keep an open mind and consider the case of these employees as well, if they make such a request before the Director. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants and the writ petitioner have readily accepted the above proposal. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that they have no qualms in approaching the Director to get their grievance redressed. The above prayer is accepted in the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases. 6. We make it clear that we have not considered the merit or demerit of any individual case before us. It will be open to the Institute to take an appropriate decision in the matter, of W.A.Nos.1613, 1616, 1620, 1638, 1639, 1640, 1712, 1857 of 2010, 41 of 2011 & WP(C) No. 2115 of 2010 3 course applying the same yard stick that has been adopted in the case of other similarly placed employees who have been given the benefit of absorption/regularization. 7. The appellants and the writ petitioner shall submit their individual representations before the Director within seven days from today in which event the Director shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the parties and take a decision as indicated above, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation. 8. The Director shall ensure that the order to be passed by him is communicated to the appellants and the writ petitioner without any further delay. The writ appeals and writ petition are disposed of in the above terms. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. rkc