IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30211 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.S.RAMACHANDRAN, PART-TIME CASUAL SWEEPER, PULPALLY VILLAGE OFFICER, P.O. PULPALLY WAYANAD DISTRICT (RESIDING AT THENGATH HOUSE, P.O.PULPALLY, PIN-673579. BY ADV. SRI.SARVOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMNT, REVNUE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD DISTRICT 4. TAHSILDAR, SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK OFFICE, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, PULPALLY VILLAGE OFFICE, PULAPALLY.P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673579. 6. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.W.D. BUILDING SECTION, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT. MS.ANU SIVARAMAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.30211 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as a Casual Sweeper at the Pulpally Village Office. According to him, he has been continuing in that post from 01/09/1995 onwards. He sought regularisation in service, and pursuant to the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.37496/2008 dated 05/01/2009, his claim was considered by the 1st respondent, and was rejected as per Ext.P1 order dated 03/04/2009 on the ground that the sweeping area of the Office is less than 100 sq.m., and therefore, the petitioner is not eligible for regularisation of his service. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to Ext.P3, a certificate issued by the Assistant Engineer, PWD, Building Section, Sulthan Bathery to the effect that the sweeping area of the office, where the petitioner is allegedly working, is 113.80 sq.m. Referring to Ext.P5, the petitioner also contends that, subsequently the sweeping area of the Office has WP(C) No.30211/2009 -2- been increased by another 22 sq.m. It is stated that it was without adverting to Ext.P3, or the enhanced sweeping area as indicated in Ext.P5, his claim was considered and rejected by Ext.P1. The learned counsel also refers to Exts.P6 & P7 judgments, where, according to him, similar claim for regularisation has been upheld by this Court. 3. In my view, having regard to the contents of Exts.P3 & P5, the matter needs to be considered, and if as a matter of fact, the sweeping area of the office, where the petitioner is working, is more than the prescribed limit, there is no reason to deny the benefit of regularisation. On a reading of Ext.P1 Government Order, the impression one gets is that the area certified by Ext.P3 and mentioned in Ext.P5 was not considered by the Government. Having regard to the above, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- That Ext.P1 order dated 03/04/2009 of the 1st respondent will stand set aside. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this judgment before the 5th respondent, who shall get the sweeping area of the Village Office, Pulpally, measured, and a proposal will be WP(C) No.30211/2009 -3- placed before the 3rd respondent, for onward transmission to the 1st respondent, who shall reconsider the matter in the light of the report so received. It is directed that the whole exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months of production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg