IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2008 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 6647 of 2008(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. G. VENU, S/O. L.GANGADHARAN, AGED 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT VARSHALAYAM,PUNNAKKADU, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. AMEER HUSSAIN A., S/O. ALIKANNU N., MEERA NIVAS, VAZIMUKKU, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 501. 3. P. SINDHU, D/O. SREENIVASAN, AGED 38 YEARS, VARSHALAYAM, PUNNAKKADU, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. KUMARI SINDHU S., D/O. K.RAVINDRAN NAIR, EDUKATHU VEEDU, VEDIVACHAN COIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 501. 5. BEENAKUMARI S.S., D/O. SUKUMARAN N., PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KAROORKONAM, PERURKADA P.O. T.C.5/768, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. SUSHMAKUMARI, "VISAKHAM", NELLIVILA, BALARAMAPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. S. DIVAKARAN, S/O. SREEDHARAN NADAR, PARANKIMAMVILA, SREEDHARA MANDIRAM, MULLOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. P. SREEKUMARI, D/O.K.RAGHUNATHAN, ASWATHY BHAVAN, THATTARASSERY VADAKKUKARA, VATTVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 132. 9. K. SANTHOSHKUMAR, S/O. KRISHNAN P., MANTHARA THODU VILA PUTHAN VEEDU, MAMPAZHAKARA, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 10. SREELEKHA S.P., D/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SNIL BHAVAN, CHENPRAKONAM, MANGALAKKAL, KATTAKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 6647 of 2008 -2- 11. VANAJAM P., D/O. VASUDEVAN NAIR, SURENDRAVILASOM, CHOWARA, CHOWARA P.O., BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 12. REEJAKUMARI T.S., D/O. SUDHA T., SHEEJASADANAM, ITHIYOOR, BALARAMAPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695501. 13. SUJITHA N.R., D/O.NARAYANAN K., N.R.NIVAS, ITHIYOOR, BALARAMAPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 14. AJITHA S., D/O.G.JANARDHANAN, EDUVA LACKSHAM VEEDU, BHAGAVATHINADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 501. 15. JAYAKUMARI A., D/O. G.APPUKUTTAN, CHANDRASADANAM, ULAPPARA, MANNAMKONAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 16. MEENAKUMARI, PAZHAVILA PUTHENVEEDU, PAZHINJIKUZHI, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SMT.KVP.JAYALEKSHMY SRI.M.AJAY (IRUMPANAM) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE TRIVANDRUM SPINNING MILLS LTD., BALARAMAPURAM,REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR THE TRIVANDRUM SPINNING MILLS LTD, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 6647 of 2008 -3- 4. KERALA TEXTILE CORPORATION, REGD. OFFICE GROUND FLOOR, SREESASTHAKRIPA OFFICE COMPLEX, P.B.NO.2008, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. M/S.B.S.KRISHNAN & ASSOCIATE, SC.KSTC GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN SRI.K.ANAND FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).6647/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT I heard learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.R.S.Kalkura, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 Mr.K.Anand and the learned Government Pleader, Mr.Bejoy Chandran. 2. Petitioners were formerly employed in the third respondent. When the Company was closed, their services were dispensed with. They were paid compensation in terms of Ext.P28. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Voluntary Retirement Scheme provided under Ext.P28 also contemplates the situation where the employees whose services have been dispensed with under VRS may be engaged in future subject to the condition that they shall have to return the ex-gratia pension. I do not think it is necessary to finally pronounce on the correctness of the submission made in this regard. It is common case that steps are W.P.(C).6647/2008 2 contemplated to re-open the third respondent. Petitioners have sought for re-engagement in the third respondent. Learned counsel for the third and fourth respondents submits that the petitioners' representation is being considered by the Board of Directors in the meeting, which is scheduled to be held this week itself. Submission is recorded. But, I am of the view that ultimately the petitioners’ case will have to be considered by the Government. 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:- 4. Decision, if any, taken by the Board of Directors of the third respondent on the claim made by the petitioners for re-engagement in the event of the third respondent resuming operations, shall be forwarded to the Government within one month of such decision being taken and there upon, Government shall take a decision on the petitioners' claim within a period of two months, W.P.(C).6647/2008 3 thereafter. A representative of the petitioners shall be heard by the Government before such decision is taken. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs