IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2009 / 26TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 10098 of 2009(F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SMT.SHEEJA.O.T., OLOTHALAKKEL VEEDU, ERAMANGALAM.P.O., BALUSSERY (VIA), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.C.RATNAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR, DEPT.OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. 3. VETERINARY SURGEON, VETERINARY DISPENSARY, KUNNAKKODI, THURUTHIYAD.P.O., KOZHIKODE. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------- W.P(C) No. 10098 of 2009-F ------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.M.C.Retnakaran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Anu Sivaraman, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner, who is presently working as Casual Sweeper in the Veterinary Dispensary at Kunnakkodi in Kozhikode District, has filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P3 and P4 orders issued by the second and fourth respondents respectively. By the said orders, the petitioner was informed that she cannot be regularised in service by creating a post of Part time Contingent Sweeper as she was engaged along with another Sweeper namely Smt.Chandrika. 3. The fact that the petitioner has been working in the office of the third respondent for the past several years is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the sweeping area of the Veterinary Dispensary, where the petitioner is employed exceeds 100 sq. metrs. The petitioner has along with this writ petition produced Ext.P6 relinquishment letter executed by Smt.Chandrika whereby she has relinquished her claim for regularisation and also stated in a categorical terms that she has no objection to the petitioner being regularised. From Exts.P3 and P4 it is evident that the W.P(C) No. 10098 of 2009-F 2 Government have rejected the petitioner's request for regularisation on the short ground that another casual sweeper was also being engaged. In my opinion in view of Ext.P6, the Government ought to reconsider the matter and decide whether the petitioner is entitled to be regularised in service. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. i) The third respondent shall in consultation with the second respondent forward a proposal to regularise the petitioner in service as Part time Contingent Sweeper to the Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry Department, after determining the sweeping area with notice to and in the presence of the petitioner. This shall be done within two months from today. ii) The Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry Department shall, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the proposal from the second respondent, consider whether the service of the petitioner can be regularised in terms of G.O(P) No.501/2005/Fin. dated 25.11.2005. iii) The Government shall before taking a decision in the matter afford the petitioner and Smt.Chandrika, a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Government shall after orders are passed as directed above, communicate copies thereof to the petitioner and Smt.Chandrika. iv) The petitioner shall produce the original of Ext.P6 before the Government at the time of hearing. Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE ab //True Copy// PA to Judge