IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 OP.No. 22043 of 2001(Y) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M.SHAFUDEEN, DRILLING ASSISTANT, KERALA MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, KESVADASPURAM, PATTAM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE, BY ADV.MR. MR.A.D.SHAJAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY AND PROJECT DIRECTOR, KERALA MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 4. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU T.K. R3 BY ADV. MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.35843/2001 IN O.P.NO.22043/2001 Y DISMISSED 7/12/2009 SD/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(RT) 832/77/ID DTD. 2/08/1977. P2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.27/78-79/1281/C/78 DTD. 11/05/1978. P3: COPY OF THE BOND EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 16/06/1978. P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DTD. 1/07/91. P5: COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE KERALA MINERAL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, DTD. 24/09/1992. P6: COPY OF THE SUBMISSION BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 29/06/1992. P7: COPY OF THE MEMO INSTRUCTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 9/10/92 NO.1113/T2/91. P8: COPY OF THE SUBMISSION BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 22/10/92. P9: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DTD.27/05/1993. P10: COPY COPY OF THE MEMO SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 22/07/93 TO THE PETITIONER. P11: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.15253/1993 DTD.3/7/1996. P12: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 30/09/1996. P13: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS)79/97/ID DTD. 26/05/1997. P14: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.10462/1997 DTD. 8/10/1997. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S. SIRI JAGAN, J ................................................ O.P. No. 22043 of 2001 ................................................. Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T While the petitioner was working as a Drill Worker under the 1st respondent, the Government appointed a committee for selecting candidates for appointment on contract basis as Drilling Assistants. In the selection process, the petitioner participated and the petitioner was selected for appointment as Drilling Assistant by Ext.P2. Pursuant to that appointment, the petitioner was permitted to execute an agreement as directed in Rule 8, Part I of Kerala Service Rules. Accordingly, the petitioner was appointed on temporary and contractual basis up to 31.12.1980 after executing Ext.P3 bond. Even after 31.12.1980, the petitioners service as Drilling Assistant was continued. The petitioner was actually asked to do the work of a Driller. But he was not paid the salary attached to that post. He petitioner made representations seeking regularisation of the petitioners service as a Driller. By Ext.P11 judgment dated 3.7.1996 in O.P. No.15253 of 1933, this court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's claim for regularisation. The Government took up O.P. No. 22043 of 2001 -2- the matter with the Public Service Commission who refused to grant approval for such proposal. Therefore the Government by Ext.P13 order dated 26.5.1997. rejected the claim of the petitioner for regularisation in service. Petitioner again approached this court by filing O.P.No.10462/97, in which this court passed Ext.P14 judgment, holding that the petitioner is entitled to have his claim considered for regularisation in service. The petitioner filed this original petition complaining that the direction in Ext.P4 judgment has not been complied with. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the P.S.C. wherein it is stated that approval for the proposal for regularisation of service of the petitioner was rejected by the PSC and overruling the same, the Government passed orders regularising the service of the petitioner as a Driller as a special case, by order dated 23.4.1998. The petitioner now submits that the petitioner is entitled to have his service regularised as a Driller with effect from 1978, when he was appointed as a Drilling Assistant, though on contract basis. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the PSC also. O.P. No. 22043 of 2001 -3- 4. I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to regularisation as a Driller from 1978, insofar as he was appointed only as a Drilling Assistant with effect from 1978. However, I am of opinion that the petitioner is entitled to have his service regularised as a Drilling Assistant, with effect from the date his appointment as a Drilling Assistant by Ext.P2 order. Accordingly there would be a direction to the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner as a Drilling Assistant with effect from the date of Ext.P2 order. But his regularisation as a Driller by order dated 23.4.1998 would stand. However, the petitioner will not be entitled to any monetary benefits arising from his regularisation as a Drilling Assistant from 1978, but he would be entitled to all other service benefits in respect thereof. The orders in this regard shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The original petition is disposed of as above. sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs // True copy // PA to Judge