IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 25595 of 2011(Y) --------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- JEESIS.C.C., SUPERINTENDENT, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAMESH SRI.NAVEEN.T SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -695 001. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. E.M. ABDUL KHADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 25595 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY FO THE ORDER, G.O.DATD 12/12/2000 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER, G.O. DATED 3/10/2006 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 9/3/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY FO THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11/7/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 8/8/2011 SENT TO THE GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 25595 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th November, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner is at present working in the Development Wing of Thrissur Corporation. While deciding to wind up the Palakkad Development Authority as per Ext.P1 the petitioner and other employees of the said organisation were accommodated in various municipalities and the Thrissur Urban Development Authority. However, no steps were taken thereafter to absorb the petitioner and others into service till 2006. As per Ext.P2 order all employees including the petitioner were absorbed into Municipal Common Service in the year 2006. 2. The petitioner complains that though he was also absorbed in the Municipal Common Service as per Ext.P2, he was forced to continue in the Development wing itself due to the inaction on the part of the respondents. Consequently he is not included in the seniority list under the Municipal Common Service whereas the names of all the other employees are so included. The petitioner has therefore been requesting that he also be absorbed into the Municipal Common Service. The delay on the part of the WPC25595/2011 2 respondents in issuing necessary orders is adversely affecting his carrier prospects. Though the petitioner had submitted representations, no orders were passed thereon. The petitioner has produced Ext.P4, his last representation. Ext.P5 is the communication forwarding the petitioner's representation to the first respondent. The petitioner seeks the issue of appropriate directions for consideration of Ext.P4 expeditiously. 3. I have heard the learned Govt. Pleader also. 4. In view of the limited relief that is claimed, I am of the view that Ext.P4 can be directed to be considered and disposed of without further delay. 5. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the grievances of the petitioner set out in his representation, evidenced herein by Ext.P4 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj P.S.to Judge WPC25595/2011 3