IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3857 of 2010(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. SHYLAJAKUMARI P.G., PUSHPA VILASOM, POOPADI P.O., SULTHANBATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, SULTHANBATHERY). 2. LUCY M.K., METHIPARAYIL HOUSE, NENMENI, SULTHANBATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, SULTHANBATHERY). 3. NISHA P., VALLATHIL HOUSE, KADACHIRA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, IRIKKUR). 4. T.SANTHI, CHULLIVAYAL HOUSE, KALLAYI P.O., KOZHIKODE DIST. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, KALPETTA). 5. HASEENA K.K., KARUPPARAMKANDI HOUSE, NANMANDA P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, KALPETTA). 6. JASMIN C.T.P., PUNNAPPALA HOUSE, MEPPADAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, THALIPARAMBA). 7. SAFIA T., THURUSIKKAL HOUSE, CHERUSSERY P.O., KOZHIKODE. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, KALPETTA). 8. MINI PILAKKATTU, CHIRAYIL HOUSE, ARIYALLOOR P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, KASARAGOD). 9. BINDU T.M., MELEKKAVIL HOUSE, KAIPPALLYKUNDU, KOTTAKKAL P.O., MALAPPURAM. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, KANHANGAD). 10. B.H.SALINA, BEEYATHIL HOUSE, KALLEKKADU P.O., PALAKKAD DIST. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, PALAKKAD). W.P.(C). NO.3857/2010-F: 11. PRABHA GANDHI V., THADUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, NEELESWARAM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, MANJESWARAM). 12. BINDU C.S., CHEMBAKASSERY HOUSE, NALUKETTU P.O., KORATTY, THRISSUR. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, MANJESWARAM). 13. MEERA JAYAPRAKASH, HOUSE NO.77, LAKSHMI, ANJALI NAGAR, PALLITHOTTAM, KOLLAM. (SUPERVISOR, ICDS PROJECT, IDUKKI). BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN, SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD, SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM), SRI.MATHEW SUNNY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE(A)DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. ANTONY MUKATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.3857/2010-F: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 01/06/2005 IN W.P.(C).NO.13307/2005. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.(RT).NO.366/2005/SWD DTD. 30/07/2005. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E1 (3)/16765/05 DTD. 16/08/2005. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT).NO.241/2009/SWD DTD. 19/05/2009. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 41632/08 DTD. 01/06/2009. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(MS).NO.57/2009/SWD DTD. 16/12/2009. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE P.1. BEFORE THE R.1. DTD. 22/01/2010. EXT.P.8: -DO- FILED BY THE P.2. EXT.P.9: -DO- FILED BY THE P.3. EXT.P.10: -DO- FILED BY THE P.4. EXT.P.11: -DO- FILED BY THE P.5. EXT.P.12: -DO- FILED BY THE P.6. EXT.P.13: -DO- FILED BY THE P.7. EXT.P.14: -DO- FILED BY THE P.8. EXT.P.15: -DO- FILED BY THE P.9. EXT.P.16: -DO- FILED BY THE P.10. EXT.P.17: -DO- FILED BY THE P.11. EXT.P.18: -DO- FILED BY THE P.12. EXT.P.19: -DO- FILED BY THE P.13. EXT.P.20: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E3/9009/09 DTD. 01/07/2010. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 3857 OF 2010 (F) ===================== Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are ICDS Supervisors working on contract basis. In this writ petition, they claim regularization in service. According to the petitioners, 47 of their colleagues were ordered to be regularized by Ext.P6 order. Relying on Ext.P6, they also sought regularization by filing Exts.P7 to P19 before the 1st respondent. Orders were not passed, and therefore, the writ petition is filed. 2. Petitioners now point out that, by Ext.P20, orders have been issued by the 2nd respondent implementing Ext.P6, and therefore, their representations should be considered on an expeditious basis. 3. If as stated by the petitioners, their colleagues, who are similarly situated have been regularised, they are entitled to have their claim for regularization also considered in the same manner. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on Exts.P7 to P19 representations in the light of Exts.P6 and P20 referred to above. Orders shall be WPC No. 3857/10 :2 : passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp