IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 36582 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SANISH JACOB, AGED 30 KARINTHOLIL HOUSE, ELAMTHESAM, ELAMDESHAM PO, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.SHAIJAN JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHIEF ENGINEER (HR) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VIDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, KSEB, VIDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA. 3. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, SECRETARIATE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.S.ANIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.36582 of 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner claims that he has been working as a Meter Reader/Spot Biller at Thodupuzha Electrical Sub Division in the Kerala State Electricity Board. He claims that he has been working continuously for a past four years. Though he has claimed regularisation, the same has not been granted. According to the petitioner, Ext.P5 representation claiming regularisation of his service has been submitted to the first respondent. However, no orders have been passed thereon. 2. The Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board on instructions submits that the petitioner is only a contract employee who has worked as a Meter Reader during the period from April 2009 to December 2009. According to the counsel, such Meter Readers are appointed on contract basis and are W.P.(C)No.36582/2009 2 terminated on the expiry of the term of their appointment. The method of appointment to the cadre of Meter Reader/Spot Biller is through the Public Service Commission. Therefore, the request of the petitioner cannot be acceded to. 3. Since the petitioner is a person who has been appointed on contract basis for a specific term, he cannot claim any right for regularisation. The petitioner might have been appointed for a further term, but the same also would be on the basis of a fresh contract. Such appointments cannot confer a right of regularisation on the petitioner since the normal method of appointment is through the PSC. However, since no orders have been passed on Ext.P5 by the first respondent till date, the first respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 in accordance with law, on an early date. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/