IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2010 / 25TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24942 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- JAYANTHI.A,ERATHU HOUSE, KUREEPUZHA,KAVANAD PO,KOLLAM(FULL TIME SWEEPER), GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRAINING INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN,KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM-691001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL,GOVERNMENT ITI FOR WOMEN, KOLLAM-12. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF TRAINING, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,TRIVANDRUM-695001. 4. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER,KOLLAM-691001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 24942 OF 2010 (P) ===================== Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that she was appointed on a provisional basis as a Full Time Sweeper by Ext.P3 order dated 27/12/2005. Although she worked for the full term and continued thereafter, when she apprehended termination, she approached this Court and filed WP(C) No.16028/06. On the dismissal of the Writ Petition, she filed WA No.1919/08, which was disposed of by Ext.P4 judgment directing that the petitioner be engaged, on expiry of the tenure of the person who had replaced her. Subsequently, petitioner sought review of the judgment by filing RP 272/09. The review petition was disposed of by Ext.P5 order directing that the petitioner shall be reappointed, if there was no eligible hand for promotion as Part Time Contingent employee in Kollam District as on 27/12/2005. 2. Subsequently, the petitioner filed Contempt Case No.911/09, on the allegation that despite the non availability of anybody in Kollam District as on 27/12/05 for promotion, she was not appointed. However, the contempt petition was closed by WPC No. 24942/10 :2 : Ext.P6 judgment. It is thereafter that this writ petition has been filed complaining that despite the binding direction in Exts.P4 and P5 judgments rendered by a Division Bench of this Court and non availability of candidates as on 27/12/05 for promotion, petitioner is not appointed. 3. In the Special Rules for Last Grade Servants, the Sweeper cum Scavenger is included at Category IV. In Rule 5, under Category IV in Sub Rule (b), it is provided that the post is to be filled up by promotion of Part Time Contingent Employees from the common seniority list prepared by the District Collectors on Revenue Districtwise basis and that in the absence of suitable hands for promotion, by direct recruitment through Employment Exchange. It was therefore that, in Ext.P5 order passed by the Division Bench of this Court disposing of the review petition filed by the petitioner, where it was ordered that if nobody was available for promotion, as on 27/12/05, when by Ext.P3 oder, petitioner was initially appointed, the petitioner shall be re- appointed. Ext.P9 is the final seniority list of Part Time Sweepers for the period up to 30/6/06. This includes 83 persons, among whom, 81 persons are appointed prior to 27/12/05, the last of WPC No. 24942/10 :3 : which is appointed on 5/9/05. This therefore evidences that as on 27/12/05, Part Time Sweepers were available for promotion as on 27/12/05 and therefore, petitioner could not have been reappointed. If that be the position, petitioner cannot complain that the respondents have refused to reappoint the petitioner, despite the direction in Ext.P5 order disposing of RP No.272/09. Resultantly, the claim of the petitioner for reappointment is only to be rejected. Writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp