IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2008 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 17114 of 2008(K) PETITIONERS: ----------------------- 1. RAJU C.,T.C.45/838, WATTS ROAD, VALIATHURA, VALLAKADAVU PO., TRIVANDRUM-695008 2. RADHAKRISHNAN R.FLAT 135, SECRETARIAT RAJAJI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM. 3. JAYAN THOMAS, VENGALOOR HOUSE, CHITTADY PO, MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM. 4. PRASAD KUMAR P.R., LEKSHMI VILASAM, T.C.7/647, KANJIRAMPARA PO., MARUTHAMKUZHY, TRIVANDRUM. 5. UDHAYAKUMAR R., NALPPARA MUDUMPIL VEEDU NEAR ARAPPURAVILAKOM TEMPLE, KARIKKAKOM BEACH PO., TRIVANDRUM 6. K.SASI, SOBHANAN, MANDIRAM MELETHARA, T.C.69/2113.POONTHURA PO., TRIVANDRUM 7. SHIBU.C.S., TC.78/3720, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, RAJIVE NAGAR, BEACH PO., TRIVANDRUM 8. EDWIN M.JAIN HOUSE, VALIATHURA, WATTS ROAD, VALLAKADAVU PO.,TRIVANDRUM WP(C).No. 17114 of 2008 :: 2 :: 9. VISHNU S.NAIR, ANU NILAYAM, STUDIO ROAD, NEMAM PO., TRIVANDTRUM BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SMT.K.DHANYA MURALEEDHARAN SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. CHAIRMAN , AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, RAJEEV GANDHI BHAVAN, SAFDARJUNG, NEW DELHI. 2. AIR PORT DIRECTOR, AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, TRIVANDRUM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TRIVANDRUM BY ADV. SRI.K.L.NARASIMHAN SRI.V.SANTHARAM FOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17114 of 2008 K ------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners are working as Bird Scarers in the Trivandrum Inter-national Airport for the last more than 13 years. The details of the petitioner's service is given in a tabulated form in the writ petition. 2. According to them, though they have been engaged through a labour supply contractor, their work is being supervised and controlled by the Airport Authority of India officials. The petitioners contend that they are entitled to be considered for Last Grade (D group) employments in the Airport Authority, with relaxation of age and educational qualifications. The petitioners contend that the Airport Authority has, in the meanwhile, sent a requisition to the District Employment Officer to sponsor candidates for 12 vacancies of Junior Attendant (Safaiwala). 3. Learned standing counsel for the Airport Authority submits that pursuant to Ext.P1, the Employment Officer has sponsored 435 candidates and the selection process is still pending. W.P.(C).NO.17114/08 :: 2 :: 4. In the meanwhile, the petitioners have moved the Chairman of the Airport Authority, seeking the indulgence of the Authority. Essentially, they pray that they may be accommodated against the vacancies of Junior Attendant (Safaiwala), taking note of their continuous service as Bird Scarers for more than 13 years, though under a contractor. 5. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners Sri.Thomas Abraham and the learned standing counsel for the Airport Authority of India Sri.V.Santharam. 6. Going by the vacancies which are notified and the fact that the petitioners have been functioning as Bird Scarers, it may not be straight away possible to direct the Airport Authority of India to accommodate the petitioners in the post of Junior Attendant (Safaiwala). But, it is always open to the Airport Authority to take note of the fact that the petitioners have been discharging duties in an area which forms an integral part of the functioning of the Airport Authority for the past 13 years or so. In fact, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, they are involved in cleaning of the Airport and the taxiway. These are matters which may be considered by the Airport Authority, in the light of the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench of the W.P.(C).NO.17114/08 :: 3 :: Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Limited and others v. National Union Waterfront Workers & others {2002 (7) SCC 1}. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent or any person authorised by him, to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall be granted an opportunity of being heard through an authorised representative, before a decision is taken by the 1st respondent. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge