IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18691 of 2011(J) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. DR.UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI.S., SPECIALIST MEDICAL OFFICER (VISHA), TALUK AYURVEDA HOSPITAL, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. DR.P.GOPIDAS, SPECIALIST MEDICAL OFFICER (VISHA), GOVERNMENT AYURVEDA VISHA VAIDYA DISPENSARY, OLLUR, THRISSUR. 3. DR.SOBHANAN M.P., SPECIALIST MEDICAL OFFICER (NETHRA), DISTRICT AYURVEDA HOSPITAL, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682018. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN SRI.M.V.JOSEPH (ALAPPUZHA) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695001 2. THE DIRECTOR, INDIAN SYSTEMS OF MEDICINE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18691 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: EXT.P1 : True copy of G.O.(P) 341/81/H.D dated 31.10.81 issued by the 1st respondent. EXT.P2 : True copy of notification vide G.O(P) No.93/2005/H&FWD dated 5.4.2005 issued by the 1st respondent. EXT.P3 : True copy of representation submitted in the year 2006 by petitioners 1 and 2 before the Government. EXT.P4 : True copy of a reminder to Ext.P3 submitted by the 2nd petitioner before the 1st respondent on 12.12.2008 EXT.P5 : True copy of G.O.(P) No.289/2011/H&FWD dated 28.4.2011 issued by the 1st respondent RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: Nil //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE jma C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 18691 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 JUDGEMENT The petitioners are working as specialized medical officers in faculties of Visha and Netra under the Indian System of Medicines. They were appointed as Medical Officers (Specialized) at a time when Ext.P1 G.O dated 31.10.1981 prescribing qualifications was in force. Subsequently the qualifications in Ext.P1 were revised as per Ext.P2. As implementation of Ext.P2 was likely to effect changes in the service conditions of the petitioners to their detriment, they moved the Government seeking protection of their service conditions. Persons in certain other categories who are virtually juniors to the petitioners had also represented their grievances and sought for protection of their service conditions pursuant to the implementation of Ext.P2. The contention of the petitioner is that in the case of those persons belonging to certain other categories their grievances were looked into by the Government and appropriate steps for protecting their WP(C).No. 18691/2011 2 conditions of service were taken as is obvious from Ext.P5. However, in case of petitioners though they have represented their grievances through Exts.P3 and P4 so far, the respondents have not bestowed any attention to their grievances. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader. The power to lay down conditions of service, amending them or to protect the conditions of service in regard to a particular section even on amendment etc., are matters fall within the ambit of policy considerations of the executive. However, in view of the fact that the grievance of similarly situated persons belonging to certain other categories under the same department and virtually, juniors to the petitioners were looked into by the Government and that the representations viz., Exts.P3 and P4 submitted by the petitioner are pending consideration before the Government, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Exts.P3 and P4 representations and pass appropriate orders thereon. This shall be done within a period of two months from the date of WP(C).No. 18691/2011 3 receipt of copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation as to the merits of the contentions. Sd/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE jma //true copy// P.A to Judge