IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2011 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 33683 of 2011(I) --------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. AJITHKUMAR G., S/O. LATE V. GOPINATHAN NAIR, NOW RESIDING AT "ATHAM", MYTHRI NAGAR, VALIYAVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REMYAMOL C.S., CHERUPURA THEKKETHATTU PUTHEN VEEDU, VILAPPIL, PEYADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHAFIQ B., TC 39/223, ATTAKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SMT.DHANYA CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION (G) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE DIRECTOR, SREE CHITRA TIRUNAL INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11. 4. THE EMPLOYMENT DIRECTOR, EMPLOYMENT DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EMPLOYMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 6. THE EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691 305. BY STATE ATTORNEY SRI. P. VIJAYA RAGHAVAN BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SHYSON P. MANGUZHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 33683 of 2011(I) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.P&A.II/80/CLEANING ATTENDANT/SCTIMST/2008 DTD.28.7.08 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.P&A-VI/PF.1995/SCTIMST/2010 DTD.28.6.10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.P&A.VI/PF.2001/SCTIMST/2010 DTD.28.6.10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.P&A.VI/PF.2005/SCTIMST/2010 DTD.28.6.10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.21.9.2010. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.26455/G2/2008/LABOUR DTD.21.3.11 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.26455/G2/2008/LABOUR DTD.28.6.2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 33683 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th December, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the termination of their services as per Exts.P2 to P4 proceedings. The petitioners were appointed as Cleaning Attendants under the second respondent being sponsored by the Town Employment Exchange, Punalur. On the allegation that the petitioners have submitted experience certificates that were false they were terminated from service. The petitioners then approached the first respondent requesting for a fresh enquiry into the matter as per Ext.P5. The request has been rejected as per Ext.P6. Though a review petition was filed, the same has also been rejected as per Ext.P7. 2. The petitioners have filed this writ petition complaining that their services have been terminated on the basis of an enquiry which was conducted behind their back. They had no notice of the evidence or materials on the basis of which their services were terminated. Therefore, according to the petitioners, their WPC33683/2011 2 termination is arbitrary in violation of the principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside. 3. The termination orders Exts.P2 to P4 reflect the circumstances under which they were issued. It is specifically mentioned that the petitioners while being appointed, were informed that, should it be found on enquiry that they had been wrongly nominated for such appointment, they would be terminated and that it was subject to the said condition that they were so appointed. Accordingly, on it being found that the petitioners had obtained employment on the strength of certificates that were not genuine, they were issued with a show cause notice and directed to show cause within seven days of receipt thereof as to why their services should not be terminated. It was thereupon found that instead of submitting an explanation they had only requested for the grant of more time. Accordingly time was granted till 15-6- 2010 and their explanation was also considered. On consideration of their explanation it was found that their explanation was not acceptable. It has also been found that an enquiry as requested for by the petitioners was not justified in the circumstances. 4. It is clear from the procedure that has been adopted that the termination orders have been issued after complying with the WPC33683/2011 3 principles of natural justice after giving an opportunity to the petitioners to show cause regarding the proposed action. Since there is no infirmity in the procedure that has been adopted, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the termination orders Exts.P2 to P4. The petitioners have thereafter challenged their termination by Ext.P5 which has been rejected. A review petition filed has also been rejected finding that they had obtained employment by furnishing certificates that were not genuine. 5. I am not satisfied that the impugned action suffers from any infirmity as alleged. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj P.S.to Judge WPC33683/2011 4