IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 5786 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ USHA.K., KALATHIL HOUSE, KADUNGAPURAM P.O., ANGADIPURAM VIA., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT WORKING AS LOWER DIVISION INVESTIGATOR, ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT, PERUNTHALMANNA. BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 4146 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 5786 of 2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O (P) NO.33/2005 DATED 5.3.2005 EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.A. NO.1601 OF 2006 EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF G.O (P) NO.43/07/SW DATED 9.8.2007 EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1/248/208/DES DATED 16.1.2008 EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT CIRCULAR NO.175/A2/08/SWD DATED 16.1.2008 EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1 248/08/DES DATED 1.2.2008 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) Nos 4146 & 5786 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 5th June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions which have been heard together and therefore they are being disposed of by a common judgment. Reference is being made to the facts in Writ Petition No.5786 of 2008 in the first instance. 2. Petitioner was appointed on a provisional basis as a Lower Division Investigator. Petitioner is a physically handicapped person. She served from 24.2.1999 to 3.7.1999. On completion of 179 days, her services were dispensed with. By Exhibit P1 order, Government took a decision to regularize the provisional services of physically handicapped persons who are engaged during the period from 15.8.1998 to 15.8.1999. By Exhibit P3 Government Order, the benefit was extended to all the persons who had rendered service in between the period from 15.8.1998 to 15.8.1999. Petitioner was included in W.P ( C) Nos 4146 & 5786 of 2008 2 the said order and on the basis of Exhibit P4 order which was issued in consequence thereof, she joined duty as well. 3. But in the meanwhile one Federation of Blind filed WP (C) No. 37281 of 2007 challenging Exhibit P3 order. Several other writ petitions came to be filed in the wake of the same. An undertaking given by the learned Advocate General that a comprehensive solution is being worked out by the Government for the purpose of maintaining a ratio of 1:1:1 among the physically handicapped persons, was recorded. But in the meanwhile petitioner had already been appointed, as evidenced by Exhibit P4. But on the basis that the Government has decided to keep in abeyance all the appointments of physically handicapped persons till the disposal of WP(C) No.37281 of 2007, Exhibit P6 order was issued by the 2nd respondent holding that petitioner’s re engagement, as per Exhibit P4 is irregular and therefore the commencement of service as per Exhibit P4 is also irregular. 4. Similar facts are involved in WP (C) No.4146 of 2008 which was tagged finding that the issue was the same and is disposed of along with WP (C) No.5786 of 2008 with the consent W.P ( C) Nos 4146 & 5786 of 2008 3 of both the parties. WP(C) No. 37281 of 2007 has been disposed of by this Court along with a batch of cases on 6.5.2008. The interim order which was prevailing earlier and referred to in Exhibit P6 has been vacated. Comprehensive directions have been issued to the Government in the matter of filling up the vacancies made available for physically handicapped persons. 5. In the circumstances, there is no warrant for treating the petitioner’s commencement of service as irregular. Moreover in the present case the reappointment as per Exhibit P6 itself had taken place prior to the interim order passed in WP (C) No.37281 of 2007. Be that as it may, since the petitioners have been appointed by the Government pursuant to their inclusion in Exhibit P3 Government Order and Exhibit P3 Government Order is not interfered by this court, there is no warrant in treating the petitioner's commencement of service as irregular or illegal. In the result, writ petitions are disposed of in the following terms: W.P ( C) Nos 4146 & 5786 of 2008 4 Exhibit P6 in W.P (C) No.5786 of 2008 is quashed. It is declared that the petitioners services pursuant to Exhibit P4 order in both the cases shall be treated as otherwise regular. Benefits that are due to the petitioners in terms of the services rendered by them pursuant thereto shall be disbursed without any delay. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) Nos 4146 & 5786 of 2008 5