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 TUESDAY, THE 23RD AUGUST 2011 / 1ST BHADRA 1933 WA.No. 530 of 2011 ------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENTIN RP.135/2011 Dated 07/02/2011 .................... APPELLANT/3RD PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------- BIJU JOSEPH, DRIVER, PAINGOTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PAINGOTTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.MATHEW SRI.PRATHEESH.P RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS NOS.1, 2 & 4: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PERSONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 1 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 1 3. PAINGOTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PAINGOTTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 671. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.MEERA FOR R1-2 ADV. SRI.P.M.BENZIR FOR R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WA 530/2011 ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE PANCHAYAT DT.25.2.2011 AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION /TRUE COPY/ J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A. No. 530 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The writ petition, filed by the appellant, praying for a direction, not to put an end to his temporary service as a Jeep Driver of the 3rd respondent local authority, was dismissed by the learned Single judge; which is under challenge in this appeal. 2. The case of the appellant is that the post in question, though was never a sanctioned post, the Panchayat required the engagement of a driver. The petitioner was selected and engaged allegedly after notifying the vacancy in the notice board of the local authority and other Government offices concerned and was continuing in service on daily-wage basis from 28.04.2005. Later, apprehending termination of service, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the writ petition. After considering the facts and circumstances interference was declined, however, making it clear that the post in question had to be notified at least in one newspaper. The appellant is stated as aggrieved of this direction and the termination of service as per W.A. No. 530 of 2011 -:2:- Annexure I order dated 25.02.2011. The appellant, in fact had filed a review petition before the very same learned Single Judge seeking to review the judgment and after considering the matter, it was observed that there was absolutely 'no error apparent on the face of the record' to invoke the power of review and the Review Petition was also dismissed as per order dated 28.02.2011. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length. We find absolutely no ground to call for any interference as the verdict passed by the learned Single Judge is quite in conformity with the relevant provisions of law and also the binding judicial precedents as to the appointments to be effected in public services. The Writ Appeal fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge. ttb