IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 OP.No. 34147 of 2000(M) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. P.C. MARY, D/O. CHACKO, AGED 43 YEARS, PART TIME SWEEPER, DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICE (HOMEO), IDUKKI AT THODPUZHA. 2. P.P. PATHUMMA, PART TIME SWEEPER, DISTRICT GOVERNMENT HOMEO HOSPITAL, THODPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED, ADV. SRI.K.E.HAMZA. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER (HOMEO), IDUKKI AT THODUPUZHA. 3. THE CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, DISTRICT GOVERNMENT HOMEO HOSPITAL, THODUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 58347/2000 IN O.P. NO. 34147/2000-M DISMISSED 06/03/2008. SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 516/99/DMO (I) OF THE R.2. (1ST PETITIONER) DTD. 25/02/1999. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE -DO- TO THE P.2. DTD. 25/02/1999. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 1875/98/DMO (I) OF THE R.2. DTD. 11/03/1999. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 186/98/DMO (I) OF THE R.2. DTD. 11/03/1999. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 1494/2000/DMO (I) OF THE R.2. DTD. 09/08/2000. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 1873/E1/99/DMO (I) OF THE R.2. DTD. 01/12/2000. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. PT.2/99 DT. 17/02/99 TOWN EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, THODUPUZHA. //TRUE COPY// prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ========================= O.P.No.34147 of 2000-M. ========================= Dated this the 6th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are Part Time Sweepers who have been appointed by the 2nd respondent as per Exts.P3 and P4. Ext.P5 shows that their probation has been declared after one year of service. The petitioners challenge Ext.P6 by which they were ordered to be terminated. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court in CMP.No.58347/2000 dated 6.12.2000 they are continuing in service. 2. The petitioners were sponsored by the Employment Exchange. Exts.P3 and P4 show that their appointment is in terms of the existing rules for appointment of Part Time Contingent Employees. It is pointed out that prior to Ext.P6 no notice was issued to them showing any reason for termination. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the action is only on OP.No.34147/2000-M. -: 2 :- the basis of a letter sent by the Employment Officer, Thodupuzha pursuant to which the Director, Homoeopathy issued a direction to the District Medical Officer to terminate the petitioners. In fact, no reasons have been pointed out apart from the above in Ext.P6. 3. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent it is submitted that there were four vacancies of Part Time Sweepers in Idukki District and the District Medical Officer (Homoeopathy), Idukki reported those vacancies to the District Employment Officer, Kattappana on 19.12.1998. The Town Employment Officer, Thodupuzha to whom two vacancies were allotted, furnished a list of advice of 20 candidates including the petitioners. It is pointed out that by Ext.R1(a) he had mentioned that only one candidate from each category can be selected and appointed. But unfortunately 4 candidates, ie. 2 from each category including the petitioners happened to be appointed misunderstanding that the candidates advised by the Town Employment Officer, Thodupuzha are for the entire 4 vacancies. The counter affidavit also points out that the petitioners have already completed their period of OP.No.34147/2000-M. -: 3 :- probation which stands declared on completion of one year service. 4. In view of the above position it is clear that the petitioners are appointed against existing vacancies. They have completed the period of probation in accordance with the Kerala Part Time Contingent Service Special Rules. There are no irregularities in the selection procedures. What is alleged is only a mistake on the part of the District Medical Officer, Homoeopathy. But that will not affect the title to hold office of the petitioners. The reasons now shown in the counter affidavit have not been stated as grounds in Ext.P6. As the vacancies are existing and when the candidates have been appointed from the list sponsored by the Employment Exchange, it cannot be said that the appointing authority lacks jurisdiction to make the appointment. There are no other claimants also. As the petitioners have successfully completed the period of probation as evidenced by Ext.P5 the attempted termination after one year and 9 months of their entry in service cannot be justified. Apart from that prior to the passing of Ext.P6 no notice has been issued to the petitioners. It cannot be OP.No.34147/2000-M. -: 4 :- disputed that the order visits with adverse civil consequences to the petitioners. Therefore the authority was bound to comply with the principles of natural justice. Apparently, non compliance of principles of natural justice vitiates the order itself. 5. For all these reasons I quash Ext.P6. It is declared that the petitioners are entitled to continue in service in accordance with the orders of appointment. The Original Petition is allowed as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. kvs/-