IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18008 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- JESSY THOMAS @ LISSY, W/O. LATE JOY, KOCHUVETTIKKAL HOUSE, AREEKKARA, VELIYANNUR.P.O, UZHAVOOR VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SRI.ROSHEN.D.ALEXANDER RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, KOTTAYAM. 4. VELIYANNUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VELIYANNUR.P.O, KOTTAYAM. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANOTNY MUKATH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.18008/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DT 9.11.98 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) NO.501/05/FIN DT 25.11.05. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 20.7.06 IN WPC 32514/04 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 1.8.06 BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DT 5.8.06 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4(b): TRUE COPY OF THE FORMAL APPLICATION DT 9.8.2006. EXT.P4(c): TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE AND INSPECTION REPORT ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER (PWD). EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE GO(O) NO.1280/2008/LOCAL SELF GOVT. DT 28.4.08. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT 26.6.09 IN WPC 22817/07. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) 1566/10/LSGD DT 10.5.2010. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 18008 OF 2008 (R) ===================== Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be a Part Time Sweeper appointed by the 4th respondent since 1998. Based on Ext.P2 GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin dated 25th November, 2005, petitioner claimed regularisation. By Ext.P3 judgment of this Court, the claim was directed to be considered. Accordingly, petitioner submitted representation which was duly recommended by the 4th respondent. The matter was considered and her claim was rejected by Ext.P5 order passed by the 1st respondent. The reason stated in Ext.P5 is that the petitioner being only a daily waged sweeper, her case is not covered by Ext.P2 Government Order. It is challenging Ext.P5, this writ petition is filed. 2. Petitioner has now produced as Ext.P7 Government Order dated 10/5/2010 regularizing the service of a Part Time Sweeper in Vechoor Grama Panchayat. A reading of Ext.P7 shows that the benefit of regularization was extended based on Ext.P2 and also GO(P) No.61/2010/Fin dated 9/2/2010, by which the Government ordered that all existing Sweepers other than casual WPC No. 18008/08 :2 : sweepers irrespective of the mode of appointment, shall also be entitled for regularization based on the sweeping area as defined in Ext.P2. 3. Evidently therefore, the basis on which the claim of the petitioner was rejected by Ext.P5 no longer survives in view of GO (P) No.61/2010/Fin referred to above. Therefore, the matter needs to be re-examined in the light of the subsequent developments. For this reason, Ext.P5 is set aside. It is directed that the claim of the petitioner for regularization shall be reconsidered by the 1st respondent in the light of the provisions contained in Ext.P2 Government Order and in the light of GO(P) No.61/2010/Fin dated 9/2/2010. Orders shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 4. It is directed that in the meantime, the interim order dated 17/6/2008 passed by this Court directing that status quo be maintained, and extended thereafter, will remain in force. 5. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp