IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 21966 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ ASHOKAN P., MULLAKKODI P.O.,MAYYIL VILA, KANNUR 670 602. BY ADVS. MR.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN SMT.K.PUSHPAVATHI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT TREASURTY OFFICER, KANNUR. 3. DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, KANNUR DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT, KANNUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21966/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE DT. 15.11.00 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT DISABILITY BOARD OF THE DISTRICT HOSPITAL KANNUR. P2:- COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DT. 12.8.99 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND 2 OTHERS. P3:- COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE DT. 10.2.2000 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P4:- COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.43/2007/SWD DT. 9.8.07. ISSUED BY THE SIT RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 22.8.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 25.9.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR SOCIAL WELFARE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. P7:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 14.12.94 IN OP. NO.15859/94. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.21966/2008-M ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a physically handicapped person having 45% disability. He was appointed through employment exchange by the second respondent as per order dated 12/08/1999 invoking Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II K.S & S.S.R. He joined as a Junior Accountant in the District Treasury, Kannur for a period of 179 days till regular P.S.C hands joins duty whichever is earlier. Ext.P2 is the said order of appointment. Pursuant to the order of appointment, he joined duty on 16/08/1999. According to the petitioner, the order of appointment was received by Registered post on 14/08/1999. Since the said date being second Saturday and 15/08/1999 being a public holiday, he could attend duty only on 16/08/1999 which is the next available working day. Ext.P3 is the discharge certificate which shows that the petitioner had completed 179 days of service and has been relieved from duty on 10/02/2000. 2. The Government as per Ext.P4 order granted the benefit of re- engagement in service of certain provisional employees who were appointed between 15/08/1998 to 15/08/1999 through Employment Exchanges. W.P.(C) No.21966/2008 -:2:- 3. The respective candidates will have to apply before the District Employment Officer to get the benefit of the said Government Order. 4. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted an application as per Ext.P5 dated 22/08/2007. The third respondent forwarded the same to the first respondent for appropriate orders. On enquiry the petitioner was informed that since he joined service only on 16/08/1999, he may not be entitled for the benefit of Ext.P4 Government Order. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for various reliefs. 5. On behalf of the third respondent, a counter affidavit has been placed on record. It is admitted that the petitioner is an Orthopaedically handicapped person with 45% disability and he has worked as Junior Accountant, Kannur from 16/08/1999 to 10/02/2000. According to the third respondent, Ext.P4 G.O. grants the benefit to persons who are appointed between 15/08/1998 to 15/08/1999 under Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II K.S.& S.S.R. It is further averred that the said Government Order prescribes a cut off date i.e. 15/08/1999 and persons who are appointed after 15/08/1999 are not entitled for regularisation. It is the case of the third respondent that since the petitioner joined service only on 16/08/1999, he could not be considered for reappointment as per the prohibition contained in Ext.P4 Government Order. W.P.(C) No.21966/2008 -:3:- 6. The question is whether the said interpretation of the Government Order Ext.P4 is correct or not. Going by Ext.P4, the benefit is granted to persons who have been appointed between 15/08/1998 and 15/08/1999. The benefit thus is granted to those who were appointed during the said period. The date of joining is not the relevant criteria. Normally, the beneficiaries will be granted joining time or even there will be delay in getting the order of appointment as is evident from the facts of this case. The writ petitioner received the order of appointment, Ext.P2 dated 12/08/1999, only on 14/08/1999. Ext.P2 shows that seven days of joining time was there. The next working day being 16/08/1999, he joined duty on 16/08/1999. He had performed duties for 179 days also. What is material for the purpose of considering the claim for re-engagement under Ext.P4 is whether the appointment is between the respective dates. If that be so, going by Ext.P2, the date of appointment is 12/08/1999. The date of joining is thus immaterial. Ext.P4 confers the benefit on a particular class of employees namely, physically handicapped provisional employees who were appointed during the said period. Therefore, an interpretation in accordance with the object and purpose of the said Government Order will have to be adopted. If that be so, the entitlement of the petitioner for re- engagement cannot be denied on the plea that the date of joining duty was on 16/08/1999. Since the same is not a pre-condition provided in Ext.P4, W.P.(C) No.21966/2008 -:4:- the third respondent was not justified in adopting an interpretation contrary to the scheme to deny the benefit of the Government Order to the petitioner. 7. Hence, it is declared that the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of Ext.P4. The third respondent will forward the application along with other details to the first respondent within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. Appropriate orders shall be passed by the first respondent in accordance with Ext.P4 for granting re- appointment within a further period of six weeks thereafter. The writ petition is allowed as above. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms