IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10425 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. P.N.YESODHARA, S.G.BHAVAN, PAYATTUVILA P.O., , VIA.BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695501 . 2. S.GIRIJA KUMARI,TC.XI/988(U) "SWARGA" DEVASOM LANE, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.NAVEEN.T RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 10425 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 31th March,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners have approached this Court seeking to quash Exhibits P8 and P9 and for declaring that the petitioners are entitled to assign their appointment as Lower Division Clerk with effect from 5.9.1986 along with consequential benefits. 2. First petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Typist on 11.6.1982 through the Public Service Commission. She had satisfactorily completed her probation in the said post on 15.6.1984. Second petitioner was appointed as L.D Typist on 9.7.1981 and had completed her probation. They were later appointed as Lower Division Clerks and have finally retired from service while holding the post of Head Clerks in the year 2008. 2. L.D Typists were entitled for interchangeability as Clerks as per the provisions of W.P ( C) No. 10425 of 2009 2 Exhibit-P2 Government Order. The petitioners applied for the said benefit and participated in the examination conducted by the PSC for L.D Typist for appointment as L.D Clerk on 9.11.1985. The result of the examination was published on 5.9.1986. They became successful and the 1st petitioner was allotted 6th place and 2nd petitioner was given third place in the list prepared after the conduct of the test. Mainly it is contended that 33 L.D Clerk vacancies were available as on 5.9.1986. Even though the petitioners were available for appointment as on that date they were not given the interchangeability in the then existing three vacancies. It is in these circumstances, the petitioners were deprived the benefit of services as L.D Clerk from an earlier date. They were later appointed as L.D Clerks only as per Exhibit-P3 order dated 13.8.1987. 3. In Exhibit-P10 representation, the 1st petitioner contends that she was entitled to get appointment against the vacancy which arose on 5.9.1986 and accordingly she was entitled for regularization as such. She has sought for re-examination of the matter including the seniority W.P ( C) No. 10425 of 2009 3 assigned to her. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that respondents may be directed to consider Exhibit-P10 and pass appropriate orders after assessing various circumstances pointed out by the petitioners. Second petitioner is yet to file a representation in this regard. If a representation is filed within three weeks from today, that also will be considered. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Government to consider and pass orders on Exhibit-P10 and any representation filed by the 2nd petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 10425 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No. 10425 of 2009 5