IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 WA.No. 429 of 2010() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.27719/2007 Dated 08/10/2007 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS 1 & 3 ---------------------------------------------------- 1. G.NAGARAJAN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.GURUSWAMY, MUNICIPAL COLONY, H.NO.2, COLLECTORATE.P.O, KOTTAYAM. 2. T.SELVAN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.THANGI, MUNICIPAL COLONY, H.NO.18, COLLECTORATE.P.O, KOTTAYAM. BY ADVS. SRI.V.B.PREMACHANDRAN SRI.S.MOHANDAS SRI.K.N.GOVINDANKUTTY MENON SRI.S.MADHAVAN NAIR SRI.GNR.UNNITHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 2 AND PETITIONERS 2 & 4 TO 11 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTTAYAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.SIBY MATHEW, SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU, SRI.B.PREMNATH (E). R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.N.Ramachandran Nair & Bhabani Prasad Ray, JJ. ==================================== W.A.No.429 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 17th day of February, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard the counsel for the appellants and standing counsel for the Muncipality. The prayer of the appellants before the learned single Judge was for regularisation of their service in the Muncipality based on Ext.P2 Government Order. However, the learned single Judge found that in order to claim the benefit of regularisation, temporary employment should be there for a period prior to 31.12.2001. Since the appellants were found to be employed subsequent to the cut off date stated above, learned single Judge rejected their claim. However, appellants produced some documents to substantiate their claim that they were employed prior to 31.12.2001 and based on such documents a review petition was filed. This was also turned out by the learned single Judge. In any case, we do not think there is any scope for this Court to decide the factual issue as to whether the appellants were employed by the Muncipality prior to 31.12.2001, WA429/10 -:2:- particularly when Muncipality has stated that this issue is the subject-matter of vigilance enquiry. This writ appeal is disposed of directing the vigilance to critically examine the claim of the appellants in the course of vigilance enquiry as to whether the appellants were employed by the Muncipality prior to 31.12.2001 and in this regard the documents pertaining to payments could also be verified by the vigilance. If the vigilance finds that appellants were engaged prior to 31.12.2001, there will be direction to the Muncipality to consider the appellants for regularisation along with the list of persons included in the seniority list under the Government Orders. C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge. sl. Bhabani Prasad Ray, Judge.