IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2011 / 16TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 352 of 2011(T) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- AJI.K, VADAKKEPURATH HOUSE, CHERIYAZHEECKAL.P.O, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ALAPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHERIYAZHEECKAL.P.O, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. THE PRESIDENT, THE ALAPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHERIYAZHEECKAL.P.O, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.352 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 6th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a driver. He was engaged on daily wages as a driver by the 2nd respondent panchayat. Similar drivers in other panchayats approached this Court when they were threatened with termination from service. In a batch of writ petitions I passed Ext.P5 judgment, wherein I refused to interfere with the termination of their services, but an observation was made as follows; “........However, in cases where any of the petitioners in these writ petitions have been appointed as temporary drivers on daily wages, after conducting a selection process known to law viz. after inviting applications from the public and making a selection from applicants, the above direction shall not be applicable in those cases and they shall be allowed to continue in service until a regular hand is appointed after sanction of the post of driver or the Panchayat continues to require the service of the petitioners.” The petitioner is also sought to be terminated from service by Ext.P4 resolution adopted by the panchayat. The petitioner submits that the petitioner squarely comes within the observations in Ext.P5 judgment insofar as the petitioner was selected after a selection process as evidenced from Exts.P1 and P2. The petitioner submits that Ext.P1 notification inviting applications was published in the notice boards of several offices in the area and an interview was conducted pursuant to which only the petitioner was appointed. The petitioner, therefore, submits that insofar as the petitioner has been appointed only after a selection process, the petitioner is entitled to continue in service until a w.p.c.352/11 2 post of driver is created in the panchayat and regular selection is made in accordance with the rules. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. I am not prepared to accept Exts.P1 and P2 as an acceptable method of selection. It is not as if drivers who aspire for employment would go to Government offices where notices have been published often. Therefore, publication of the notices in the notice boards of some Government offices would not be sufficient publication of the notification inviting applications. Every person who has qualifications for the particular job is entitled to be considered for selection, failing which, it would violate their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. In order to enable all such persons to apply, there must be publication of the notice in a mode by which all such persons are made aware of the notification inviting applications. Therefore, without such applications being published at least in one newspaper, I do not think that the process of publishing notices in the notice boards of Government offices only can be accepted as proper publication of the notices inviting applications. As such, I am not satisfied that the petitioner was appointed after an acceptable method of selection. Therefore, I am not inclined to countenance the contention of the petitioner in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, I make it clear w.p.c.352/11 3 that if the petitioner makes an application before the panchayat for appointment, his application shall also be considered along with other applications or persons sponsored by the employment exchange. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge