IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 OP.No. 5212 of 2002(U) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M.SOUDAMINI, L.D.CLERK,DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (DRDA) KANNUR, COLLECTORATE, KANNUR. BY ADVS. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR SMT.RESMI G. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. COMMISSIONER FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT 2 MS BLG., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PROJECT OFFICER, DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.RANI DIOTHIMA THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ORDER ON CMP. NO.9212/2002 IN OP.5212/2002 DISMISSED 09/06/2011 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.S.14014/8/81-IRD-1 DATED 30.5.1981 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. P2:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) NO.50/84/DD DATED. 18.9.1984. P2(a):- COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE LIST OF PROVISIONAL HANDS WORKING IN DRDA. P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.28011/26/85-IRD.III/VOL.II DATED 22.7.88 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D.O.NO.R.20013/6/95 IRD .1 DATED 7.12.1995 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.1.1997 IN OP. 20212/96 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P6:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.(MS) NO.31/98/RDD DTD. 29.9.98. P7:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.4.2000 IN OP.25818/1999 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P8:- COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) 356/2000/LSGD DATED. 23.12.2000. P9:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D-13/79 DATED 31.1.2002 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P10:- COPY OF THE PAY CERTIFICATE DATED 2.2.2002 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.No.5212 of 2002-U - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P8 order whereby for regularisation of service of certain provisional employees including the petitioner, certain conditions have been prescribed. Ext.P9 is a subsequent communication issued to the petitioner, wherein after fixing the scale of pay and other benefits, it is mentioned that any excess amount drawn, will have to be recovered from the monthly salary from January, 2002. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the judgment of this Court in O.P. Nos.13957/2001 and 14854/2001 wherein the petitioner herein was the second petitioner. Therein also, the challenge was against Ext.P8 order herein and the said writ petition was disposed of in the light of the judgment in O.P. No.34949/2002. Para 2 of the said judgment is extracted below: “In view of the directions issued by this Court in O.P. No.34949 of 2002, no further orders are required except to clarify that the aforesaid directions will govern the case of the petitioners also. As regards the relief sought by the petitioners for service benefits, op 5212/2002 2 without restricting it to 29.9.1998, this Court had in O.P. No.34949 of 2002, directed the State Government to pass orders on the petitioners moving the Government in that behalf. If the state government has, as directed by this Court in O.P. No.34949 of 2002, passed orders in the case of the petitioners therein, it would govern the petitioners in these cases as well. If, on the other hand, orders have not yet been passed, it will be open to the petitioners herein to move the state government, as directed by this Court in paragraph 4 of judgment in O.P. No.34949 of 2002. In that event the government shall pass orders in the matter within three months from today. Needless to say, if orders have already been passed pursuant to the direction in O.P. No.34949 of 2002 and if it is adverse to the petitioners herein or if the petitioners are aggrieved by any order that may be passed hereafter on their representation, they may challenge it in other appropriate proceedings. Their contentions in that regard are left open. It is made clear that since this Court has already rendered a judgment, no further orders are called for in this writ petition. Proceedings Ext.P9 will be subject to the further orders to be passed by the respondents in the light of the direction issued by this Court in O.P. Nos.13957/2001 and 14854/2001. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any such consequential order, she will be free to agitate the same before the appropriate forum. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) op 5212/2002 3 kav/ T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.No.5212 of 2002-U - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 9th day of June, 2011