IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2010 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36952 of 2010(S) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- NALINAKSHAN NAMBBIAR, I GRADE COMPUTER, GOVERNMENT PRESS, SHORNUR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT. OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING, PRINTING DEPARTMENT, GOVT. CENTRAL PRESS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.36952 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. This writ petition is filed with the prayers as follows: “i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to implement the provisions of Exts.P1, P3 and P4 Government Orders, by strictly enforcing punching system among the ministerial staffs working under the 2nd respondent, forthwith; ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P4(a) representation, forthwith; iii. issue such other writ, order or direction which may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The orders Exts.P1, P3 and P4 referred to in the prayer, in our opinion, are orders dealing with the service conditions of the employees of the first respondent State of Kerala. It is repeatedly pointed out by the Supreme Court that no public interest writ petition is maintainable regarding the service conditions of the employees of the State and only the aggrieved employees could invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. WP(C) No.36952 of 2010 - 2 - In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the instant writ petition is wholly misconceived. The writ petition is therefore dismissed at the admission stage. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge vns