IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2011 / 20TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 24013 of 2011(B) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- SURENDRAN, S/O.POULOSE, SUDHISH BHAVAN, PERAPPALLY, VALIYAMALA, ARYANAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, PLAMOOD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3. THE MEMBER SECRETARY, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,POLL.C.BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.24013/2011 B APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT.25-9-2007. EXHIBIT P2: A COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 15597/2008 DATED 23-6-2009. EXHIBIT P3: A COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 2-2-2009 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4: A COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 7-1-2010. EXHIBIT P5: A COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 20-12-2010. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES (PAGES 36,37,60&61) OF NAMP CONTRACT FILE VOLUME 1 AND 2 RECEIVED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER ALONG WITH HIS LETTER DATED 11-8-2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 24013 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner from 2004 onwards he has been working for the respondents for the purpose of carrying out ambient air sampling works at NAMP stations. In this writ petition the prayer sought by the petitioner is to direct the respondents to engage the petitioner also as an ambient air sampling worker in the light of the orders contained in Ext.P6 NAMP Contract file. 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents in which the contention raised is that the petitioner was engaged for a period of one year from 4.10.2007 and that on expiry of the period of contract, he has no right to demand further work. 3. Although the contention raised by the respondents would appear to be attractive still the orders contained in Ext.P6 would contradict the said stand taken W.P.(C) No. 24013 OF 2011 :2 : by the respondents. Ext.P6, extract of the NAMP Contract file show that in order to make good the shortage of man power respondents had decided to engage persons on daily wage basis and pursuant to the orders passed, availability of three persons including that of the petitioner was ascertained and finally by order dated 9.2.11 it is seen a proposal was placed by the Environmental Engineer, for fixing the duty schedule of the petitioner. This proposal is also seen approved by his superior. For the purpose of clarity the proposal is extracted for reference. “Submissions received from P. Surendran. As per para 42 duty schedule is put up. Sreekala devi. S. - 12, Ajayan T - 12, Surendran.P - 8. Total number of 24 for monitory on daily wage basis is 32. May be approved.” W.P.(C) No. 24013 OF 2011 :3 : 4. Now that such a proposal is made and the proposal has been approved by the superior, so long as it remains in force, the same should be carried out by the officers of the respondent, Board. Therefore I dispose of the writ petition directing that the respondents shall see that the aforesaid approved proposal shall be implemented and work is provided to the petitioner unless and until the same is duly cancelled or reviewed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge