IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 25034 of 2008(E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SREELATHA.T, W/O.SURENDRAN, KUTTIYILVILA THEKKATHIL, MUTHUPILAKKAD WEST, MUTHUPILAKKAD.P.O, SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PAULY MATHEW MURICKEN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 2. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SASTHAMKOTTA. 3. ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER (GI), SASTHAMKOTTA. 4. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No.25034 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 19th day of August 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who belongs to a scheduled caste, was appointed as Lady Village Extension Officer on the basis of Ext.P1 order dated 22.2.2008. The appointment was for a period of 179 days and it was pursuant to the petitioner's name being recommended by the District Employment Officer, Kollam. The period for which the petitioner was appointed by Ext.P1 is to expire on 29.8.2008. The petitioner submits that being a member of a scheduled caste community and as her appointment was through the District Employment Exchange, she is entitled to have her service regularised. The petitioner states that she has submitted Ext.P2 representation to the District Collector, Kollam seeking continuance in service till the regular hands recruited through the Kerala Public Service Commission join duty. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, this Court has by Ext.P7 judgment directed the District Collector, Idukki to consider a similar W.P.(C)25034/2008 2 request. 2. I have heard Sri.Pauly Mathew Muricken, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.M.R.Sreelatha, the learned senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. In view of the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P7 in similar circumstances, I find no reason why the first respondent should not be directed to consider the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P2 and to pass orders within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Ordered accordingly. The petitioner may also be heard in person before orders are passed on Ext.P2. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/