IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2011 / 11TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 19130 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. BIJU T.J., CASUAL WORKER, DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL FARM, NERIAMANGALAM. 2. JIMNAS V.K., CASUAL WORKER, DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL FARM, NERIAMANGALAM. 3. PRAKASH N.P., CASUAL WORKER, DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL FARM, NERIAMANGALAM. 4. SURAJ M.A., CASUAL WORKER, DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL FARM, NERIAMANGALAM. BY ADVS. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI SMT.K.A.ANITHA RESPONDENTS: ------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL FARM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM 682 009. 4. SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT AGRICULTURE OFFICER, DISTRICT AGRICULTURE FARM, NERIYAMANGALAM-686 693. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI. A.J.VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ WP(C).No. 19130 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(MS) NO:2207/2010/AGRL. DATED 14.12.2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT P2: COPY OF THE PRCEEDINGS NO:E(1)4294/11 DATED 29.6.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS P3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO:N.E-163/11 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD PETITIONER P3(A): COPY OF THE SHEET ROLL OF WAGES LABOURERS CASUAL IN JULY, 2011 P4: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER P5: COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO:231/10/AD DATED 31.8.2010 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE JJJ K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.19130 of 2011-M. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 3rd October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are persons who were originally appointed as daily rated temporary workers. Subsequently, as per Ext.P1 order, the Government decided to regularise daily rated temporary workers like the petitioners as casual employees. Accordingly, as per Ext.P2 proceedings the petitioners were appointed as Casual Labourers. Pursuant to Ext.P2, the petitioners were continuously working as casual employees, as evidenced by Ext.R3(a). 2. While so, as per Ext.P4, the petitioners were informed that it has been decided to keep them out of service in order to implement a decision that was taken after discussions with certain outsiders who were conducting an agitation in front of the agricultural farm. Pursuant to Ext.P4, the petitioners complain that they are WP(C).No.19130/2011-M. 2 kept out of service. 3. According to the counsel for the petitioners, after having appointed them as Casual Labourers, for no fault of theirs, they have been kept out of service. The reason stated in Ext.P4 cannot be countenanced or accepted for keeping them out of service. Therefore, they seek the issue of appropriate directions for taking them back in service and permitting them to work. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents, by the learned Government Pleader. In paragraph 7 of the statement, it has been stated that on verification of the contingent bills of the farm from 1.1.2007 to 18.12.2008 it is found that the petitioners were engaged in the farm on daily wage basis as drivers and watchmen. In view of the above it is stated that a clarification is awaited in the matter from the Director of Agriculture, to take a final decision in the matter. 4. A reply-affidavit has been field on behalf of the petitioners reiterating their stand in the writ petition and producing an additional document as Ext.P5. 5. I have heard the counsel for the petitioners as WP(C).No.19130/2011-M. 3 well as the learned Government Pleader. I have anxiously considered the contentions put forward by the parties. 6. It cannot be disputed that as per Ext.P2, the petitioners who were originally temporary employees were regularised as Casual Labourers. Accordingly, as evidenced by Ext.P3(a), they were also working continuously under the respondents. There is absolutely no justification for keeping them out of service, in the above circumstances on the reasons stated in Ext.P4. What appears from Ext.P4 is that they have been kept out of service to purchase piece from some outsiders who were agitating in front of the agricultural farm of the respondents. The said reason cannot be countenanced as sufficient and tenable for keeping the petitioners out of service as sought to be done in Ext.P4. Therefore, Ext.P4 cannot be sustained. The same is accordingly set aside. The petitioners are entitled to continue as Casual Workers, in accordance with the terms and conditions of their regularization, as evidenced by Ext.P2. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed, WP(C).No.19130/2011-M. 4 setting aside Ext.P4 and directing the respondents to continue to engage the petitioners in accordance with the terms of their regularization contained in Ext.P2. No costs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-