IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 24572 of 2011(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- JANCYRANI V.K, RADHANILAYAM THAYYILTHAZHAM, P.O.POKKUNNU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.RAJ MOHAN R.PILLAI, SRI.P.BANI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY DEVELOPMENT (JA) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 033. 3. DIRECTOR, FOOD PROCESSING & NUTRITION CENTRE, BALUSSERI, CALICUT DISTRICT,PIN - 673 612. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.24572/2011-V: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R.3. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE B.SC. (HOME SCIENCE) DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF TRAINING PROGRAMME IN VALUE ADDITION TO FRUIT AND VEGETABLE PRODUCTS HOLISTIC APPROACH IN FOOD CHAIN HELD AT CENTRAL FOOD TECHNOLOGICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE (CFTRI) FROM 15/09/2008 TO 26/09/2008. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 04/05/2006 BEFORE THE R.2. PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE R.3. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.24572 of 2011-V. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a lady, who has been working as a Technical Assistant under respondents 2 and 3 in the Food Processing and Nutrition Centre at Balussery from 12.3.2003. She was initially appointed from the Employment Exchange as per Ext.P1, on provisional basis. After the term of the said appointment was over, she was allowed to continue on daily wages and according to her, she has been continuing ever since. 2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the method of appointment contemplated is through the Employment Exchange and therefore the petitioner has been appointed by following the proper procedure prescribed. Considering her long and continuous service, the petitioner claims that she is entitled to regularization in service. She has submitted her grievances to the third respondent, as per Ext.P4 representation. However, no orders have been issued WP(C).No.24572/2011-V. 2 thereon till date. Ext.P4 has been forwarded to the second respondent along with Ext.P5 letter recommending the same favourably. Therefore, the representation of the petitioner is now pending consideration of the second respondent. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 4. In view of the fact that Ext.P4 is pending consideration of the second respondent, it is not necessary for me to consider the contentions of the petitioner on merits, at this stage. 5. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the grievances of the petitioner set out in Ext.P4 representation and recommended by Ext.P5, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, (Judge) Kvs/-