IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 3563 of 2011(U) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- PUSHPARAJ .R., AGED 42, S/O. RENGAN, VATTULUCKY, MATTATHUKAD P.O., AGALI, PALAKKAD. (WORKING AS DRIVER AT SHOLAYUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH). BY ADVS. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN, SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI, SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY, SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR, SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SHOLAYUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SHOLAYUR, MATTATHUKAD P.O., AGALI, PALAKKAD-678 581, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. L.G. SURESH BABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.3563/2011-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(MS).NO.169/2007/LSGD DTD. 29/06/2007. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 11/01/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.3563 of 2011 ---------------------------- Dated 8th July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is working as Driver under the second respondent, the Sholayur Grama Panchayat,, on daily wage basis. He has been working as such uninterruptedly for the past seven years. The contention of the petitioner is that under similar circumstances, similarly situated daily wage employees were regularized, as is obvious from Ext.P1. In the said circumstances, seeking regularization of service, he has preferred Ext.P2 representation before the Government. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the receipt of Ext.P2 representation no orders have so far been passed on his request for regularization. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. 3. As already noticed hereinbefore, the grievance of the petitioner is that even after receipt of Ext.P2, the request of the petitioner for regularization is not being taken up for consideration though under similar circumstances services of similarly situated daily rated employees were regularized. In the circumstances, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions, this writ WP(C).No.3563/2011 2 petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 representation expeditiously. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS