IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2010 / 15TH POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 502 of 2007 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.3536/2007 Dated 06/02/2007 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ A.K.ABDULLA, S/O.MOIDU, PONMERIPARAMBIL, VILLIAPPALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE PROJECT DIRECTOR, SARVASIKSHA ABHIYAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER, SARAVASIKHA ABHIYAN, KOZHIKODE. 4. BLOCK PROGRAMME OFFICER, SARVASIKSHA ABHIYAN, BLOCK RESOURCE CENTRE, THODANNUR, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/01/2010, ALONG WITH WA NO. 506 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A.NOS.502 & 506/2007 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 5th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. W.A.No.502/2007: The writ petitioner is the appellant. He was a temporary hand, appointed as Peon-cum-Menial in the office of Sarva Siksha Abhiyan at Thodannur. Ext.P1 appointment order would show that he was appointed on daily wage basis and his services were liable to be terminated at any time. Apprehending that he will be terminated from service, the Writ Petition was filed. The learned Single Judge found that in view of the terms contained in Ext.P1, the appellant/writ petitioner does not have any legal right for retention in service. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition was dismissed. Hence this appeal. 2. In this appeal the learned Government Pleader has filed a statement, stating that the appellant was already terminated on 30.01.2007 and another person appointed and only WA Nos.502 & 506/07 - 2 - thereafter the Writ Petition was filed. 3. The appellant is a temporary hand, appointed subject to the terms in Ext.P1. He was appointed de hors the provisions contained in the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules. Such an appointee has no legal right for retention in service and the respondents do not owe any corresponding duty to him in that regard. In the absence of a legal right and a corresponding duty in the respondents, the appellant/writ petitioner is not entitled to get any relief from this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. W.A.No.506/2007: 4. In view of the judgment in W.A.No.502/2007, this Writ Appeal is also dismissed. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. C.T.Ravikumar, Judge. nm.