IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32528 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.BENJAMIN, MELEKALLUVILA VEEDU VANYAKODE, PARASSALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DIRECTORATE, VIKAS BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. 2. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE VIKAS BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.NANDAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32528 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 5th November, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a person with disability, was provisionally appointed as Peon in the office of the second respondent for a period of 179 days. He joined duty on 14.5.2008. He thereafter submitted Exts.P5 and P6 representations before the second respondent seeking continuance in service beyond the period of 179 days. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to consider his request in Exts.P5 and P6 representations and also for a direction to the respondents not to terminate his service on the expiry of 179 days. 2. A Full Bench of this Court has in Radha v. District Medical Officer (2002 (2) KLT 711 (FB) held that a person appointed on a provisional basis under Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the K.S. & S.S.R. has no right to continue in service beyond the period for which he/she was appointed. The 9th proviso to W.P.(C) No.32528/2008 2 Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the K.S. & S.S.R. also prohibits the same. In the light of the authoritative pronouncement of this Court in Radha v. District Medical Officer (supra) and the statutory provisions contained in the 9th proviso to Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the K.S. & S.S.R., the petitioner cannot claim and the respondents also cannot permit continuance in service beyond the period of 179 days. Such being the situation, the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.