IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2555 of 2011(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. DENCY K.A., LABOURER ON DAILY WAGES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, KUNNUMPURAM HOUSE, PATTIKKAD PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. RAMLATH SULAIMAN, LABOURER ON DAILY WAGES, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, PUTHUVEETTIL HOUSE, THOTTAPADI, MANNUTHY PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.S.A.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 656. 2. THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 656. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. K.P. MUJEEB, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.2555 of 2011-T - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioners are labourers working on daily wages under the Kerala Agricultural University. The main relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to absorb the petitioners in regular service or in the alternative, confer on them the benefits granted by Ext.P6. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they have been engaged for a number of years and are now aged 40 to 42 years respectively. When the University started recruiting Casual Labourers and Permanent Labourers, the petitioners filed Exts.P3 and P4 representations in the matter. They pray that their case has to be considered like that of the petitioners in W.P. (C) No.13870/2010 which was disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment. In Ext.P5, this Court, after referring to the contentions raised by the petitioners relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi {(2006) 4 SCC 1}, directed the University to consider the claims of the petitioners in the light of para 55 of the said judgment. The operative portion of the judgment is extracted below: wpc 2555/2011 2 “In the said circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the claims of the petitioners for getting the benefit of para 55 of the decision reported in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi {(2006) 4 SCC 1} in the light of Satya Prakash and others v. State of Bihar and others (2010 (4) SCC 179). While taking such a decision, the respondents shall also look into the decisions reported in Payyannoor Education Society v. Narayani (1995 (1) KLT 621), Trivandrum Port and Head Load Workers Co-operative Society Ltd. v. Dhaneshkumar (2000 (3) KLT 10) and B. Dasan v. State of Kerala and others (ILR 1990 (1) Ker. 55). Appropriate orders based on such consideration shall be passed by the first respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.” In the light of the above, the claim of the petitioners herein also will be considered as sought for in the representations, Exts.P3 and P4, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/