IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28604 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.PONNAMMA, PART-TIME SWEEPER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, BRIDGES SECTION, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD ADMINISTRATION, PWD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISION, PWD, OFFICE, KOLLAM. 4. THE ASST.ENGINEER, PWD BRIDGES SECTION, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROAD SUB DIVISION, KOTTARAKKARA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.28604 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is presently working as part time Sweeper in the office of the 4th respondent, claims regularisation in service, in terms of Ext.P4 Government Order dated, 25.11.2005. The petitioner submits that she has submitted an application in the prescribed format . It is seen from Ext.P5 that the petitioner has moved the Government seeking regularisation in terms of Ext.P4 and that the application was returned to the Executive Engineer to clarify as to how the petitioner was paid Rs.2300/= + DA as salary. The petitioner submits that she has preferred Ext.P6 representation to the Secretary to the Government, Public Works Department, seeking regularisation of service in terms of Ext.P4 Government Order. 2. I have heard Sri.V.K.Sathyanathan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. W.P.(C) No.28604 of 2008 2 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is working as part time Sweeper in the office of the 4th respondent. Ext.P1 certificate issued by the 4th respondent discloses that the sweeping area exceeds 100 Square Meters. Ext.P3 letter dated, 17..11.2006, sent by the 4th respondent to the 5th respondent discloses that petitioner has been working as Casual sweeper in the office of the 4th respondent from 1.9.1986. Such being the situation, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation in consultation with respondents 2 to 5 and to pass orders thereon, within three months from the date on which petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment. I further direct that if the petitioner has been paid excess emoluments, such excess payment can be adjusted against her future salary and that factor need not stand in the way of the respondents from considering her claim in terms of Ext.P4 Government Order. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE nj.