IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 5217 of 2011(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. OMANAKUTTAN.K., S/O.KARUNAKARAN, CHALUMBATTU MEENATHERIL HOUSE, MEMANA, OACHIRA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. K.SASI, S/O.KUNJU PILLAI, KOCHAYYATHU HOUSE, ADINADU SOUTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRTARY TO GOVT.DEPT. OF PWED & ADMINISTRATION B DEPT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD & ADMINISTRATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KANJIRAPUZHA IRRIGATION PROJECT, KANJIRAPUZHA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 591. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SIRUVANI SAGAR VIA THACHAMPPURA, PALAKKAD-678 593. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 5217 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 23rd day of March, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners hail from Kollam. According to them, they were being engaged as casual labour in the Siruvani Irrigation Project at Palakkad. The Government passed Ext. P3 Government Order giving some benefits to casual labours. For granting that benefit, a list of eligible casual employees were prepared. The petitioners have not been included in that list. They approached this Court and obtained Ext. P4 judgment, in which it was directed to consider their case. According to the petitioners, Exts.P6 and P7 series of certificates would prove their eligibility for inclusion in the list. But, by Ext. P8, their claim was rejected on the ground that the identity of the petitioners were not proved and that it is difficult to believe that such persons from Kollam would happen to work at Palakkad. It is also stated in Ext. P8 order that the signatures of the petitioners in Exts.P 2 ane P3 and the signatures made at the time of hearing were different. Against that order, the petitioners have filed Exts.P9 and P9 (a) representations before the 1st respondent. For the present, the petitioners confine their relief for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P9 and P9(a) expeditiously. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P9 and P9(a), after affording an opportunity of W.P(C) No. 5217 of 2011 -: 2 :- being heard to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.