IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 OP.No. 28320 of 2001(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. L. RASEENA, CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTANT, KERALA KERA KARSHAKA SAHAKARANA FEDERATION, (KERAFED), HEAD OFFICE, ARISTO JUNCTION, TRIVANDRUM. 2. K. RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, SENIOR BOILER ATTENDER, KERAFED OIL COMPLEX, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.B.KAIMAL (SR.), ADV. SRI.ANIL K.NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF KERALA, AGRICULTURE (IFA) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE KERALA KERA KARSHAKA SAHAKARANA FEDERATION LTD. (KERAFED), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE, ARISTO JUNCTION, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.B. REMANI. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 46020/2001 IN O.P. NO. 28320/2001-U DISMISSED 07/03/2008. SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KFD/ADM-2/PF.280/99 DT. 08/11/1999 OF THE R.2. ADDRESSED TO THE SPL. SECRETARY TO GOVT., AGRICULTURE (PU) DEPT., TRIVANDRUM. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KFD/ADM-2/PF 280/2000/6649 OF THE R.2. ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., AGRICULTURE (IFA) DEPT., TRIVANDRUM, DT. 24/06/2000. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KFD/CHMN/11/2000 DT. 23/11/2000 OF THE R.2. ADDRESSED TO THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE, TRIVANDRUM. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER NO. G.O. (MS). NO. 296/AD DT. 08/09/2000. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN O.P. NO. 34626/2000 DT.12/12/2000. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER NO. 41610/PU2/2000/AD DT. 14/09/2001. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ========================= O.P.No.28320 of 2001-U. ========================= Dated this the 7th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge Ext.P6 letter issued by the Secretary to Government, Agricultural (PU) Department to the Managing Director, Kerafed (the 2nd respondent herein). The short facts are the following: The petitioners are permanent employees of the Kerala State Coconut Development Corporation Ltd., which is a Government owned company. The first petitioner was working as a Confidential Assistant therein from 22.3.1979 and the second petitioner was working as Boiler Attender from 18.10.1979. Because of financial difficulties the Corporation became defunct, compelling the employees to seek deputation to other departments etc. Accordingly, the first petitioner was appointed on deputation OP.No.28320/2001-U. -: 2 :- in the Kerafed as Confidential Assistant on 26.11.1997. Even though it was for a period of one year, the term was being extended. Similarly the second petitioner was also appointed on deputation as Sr.Boiler Attender on 16.2.1998 and the term was being extended from time to time. 2. When they faced the situation of the loss of employment in the Coconut Development Corporation, the petitioners requested the 2nd respondent to absorb them in their service. The 2nd respondent considered the matter favourably and decided to absorb them subject to the approval of the Government. As per Ext.P1, the 2nd respondent sought approval of the Government in that regard. This was followed by Exts.P2 and P3. The petitioners have got a case that similarly placed employees of the said Corporation have been absorbed in various public sector undertakings with the sanction of the Government. Ext.P4 is one of the orders passed by the Government, wherein one Smt.V.Thankamony, Accounts Officer of the Kerala State Coconut OP.No.28320/2001-U. -: 3 :- Development Corporation was appointed on a permanent basis in the KLD Board. Apart from that the petitioners could not avail the voluntary retirement scheme framed by the Coconut Development Corporation since they were absorbed under the 2nd respondent. Since the Government was not taking a decision in the matter they approached this Court earlier by filing OP.No.34626/2000 which was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment. This Court directed the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 in the factual situation as already noticed and to pass appropriate orders within three months. The petitioners were allowed to continue in service till a decision is taken. But by Ext.P6 their request was rejected. A reading of Ext.P6 shows that none of the aspects have been considered by the Government. The decision has been communicated in a one line order and no reasons in support of the decision have been pointed out. 3. As far as the claim of the petitioners are concerned it is submitted that they were deputed to the Kerafed and the only OP.No.28320/2001-U. -: 4 :- aspect that prevented them from joining back the Corporation is that the Corporation became defunct. Since they were continuing in the Kerafed and as they were awaiting the orders of approval of the Government for their absorption in Kerafed, they could not avail the voluntary retirement scheme framed by the Corporation. It is also clear from Ext.P4 that the Government had passed orders sanctioning the absorption of a similarly placed former employee of the Corporation in the KLD Board and that too based on their resolution. Therefore, the circumstances are similar in nature. But still the Government has chosen to reject their request, that too without stating any reasons. The justification sought for in the counter affidavit, even though that is not a ground stated in the order impugned, is that the 2nd respondent comes within the purview of Sec.80(3A) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, being an Apex Federation. It is therefore submitted that the appointment under the 2nd respondent can be only under the relevant provisions of the said statute. It is also pointed out that OP.No.28320/2001-U. -: 5 :- concurrence of the Public Service Commission is also required. 4. But surprisingly none of the above procedures have been followed while rejecting the request. Even though Sec.80(3A) provides of direct recruitment in various co-operative institutions listed therein, it is not a case where the Government is lacking power to deal with situations like this. There is ample power to the Government to consider such requests under the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act also. Ext.P6 is not a reasoned order as it is already noticed. Going by the directions in Ext.P5 judgment this Court had in detail referred to the facts leading to the request forwarded by the 2nd respondent and ultimately directed the first respondent to consider the matter in that perspective. But unfortunately Ext.P6 is a one line order, without considering any of the relevant aspects. 5. Therefore Ext.P6 is quashed. The Government is directed to reconsider the matter in the light of the specific directions issued in Ext.P5 and in the light of the findings rendered OP.No.28320/2001-U. -: 6 :- above. The Government will also consider the fate of similarly placed employees who have been appointed in other establishments. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners will be allowed to continue in service pending the decision of the Government. The Original Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. kvs/-