IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2008 / 4TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2773 of 2008(E) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ C.A.MUSTHAFA, PART-TIME SWEEPER, KUDUMBASREE, KALPETTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT MISSION CO-ORDINATOR, WAYANAD. 2. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KUDUMBASREE, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT EA DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).2773/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 24th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is working as casual sweeper in the office of the Kudumbasree at Kalpetta in Wayanad District. He had approached this Court earlier along with others in W.P.(C).38589/2003 claiming parity of wages of part-time sweepers and this Court under Ext.P2 judgment, declared that the petitioners are to be paid wages as admissible by Government orders governing the issue from time to time. Apparently, petitioner was being paid wages of Rs.1,250/- with dearness allowance. Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that his plea for regularisation in service has not been favourably considered as is evidenced from Ext.P5 communication from the Government to the Executive Director of Kudumbasree. Ext.P5 also indicates that Government has taken the stand that the petitioner is not eligible to be absorbed as part-time sweeper and will not be eligible for any arrears as per paragraph 8 of G.O.(P). 501/05 dated 25.11.05. Based upon Ext.P5, Executive Director communicated the same to the District Mission W.P.(C).2773/2008 2 Coordinator under Ext.P6. It seems that Ext.P5 is decided without hearing the petitioner nor has the procedure outlined in G.O.(P).501/05 followed in this case. 2. The scope and ambit of clause 11 of G.O.(P). 501/05 has been considered in the judgment dated 2.11.2007 in W.P.(C).13828/2007 and connected cases. In my view, petitioner's case is to be considered in the light of the said judgment. Reference may be made to Ext.P9 judgment also in this regard. 3. In the result, after hearing the learned Government Pleader also, writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to forward Ext.P8 to the Government within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment independently before the third respondent along with the representation and copy of Ext.P9 judgment as also the judgment in W.P.(C). W.P.(C).2773/2008 3 13828/2007 and connected cases. Thereupon Government shall pass fresh orders on the petitioner's claim within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, in the light of the findings and directions in the judgment in W.P.(C).13828/2007 and connected cases as also Ext.P9 judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs