IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2009 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24329 of 2008(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. M.K. VASU, MULLAMTHOTTY, ELAMPRA, NELLIKUZHY.P.O, PULIKUNNATHUMALY COLONY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. 2. P. GANESAN, ALAKKAL HOUSE, KOROOR KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. 3. C.H. MUHAMMED, CHITTATHUKUDY, ERAMELOOR.P.O, KUTTILANJI, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. 4. P.A. SASI, PULIKUNNATHUMALY COLONY, ELAMPRA, NELLIKUZHY.P.O, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. MR.P.P.JACOB MR.T.P.GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, (LOCAL ADMINISTRATION), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SHIBI ANTONY, PUTHENPURAKKAL, PUTHUPPADY.P.O, KARAKKUNNAM. BY ADV. MR.ALEXANDER JOSEPH FOR R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.24329/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF SUBSTITUTE WORKERS PUBLISHED BY IST RESPONDENT DT. 29.1.09. P2:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DT. 29.3.01. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. NO.32179/06 DT. 20.9.07. P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY RESPONDENT 1 & 2 DT. 7.6.08. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 24329 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P4 to the extent by which the 4th respondent is given the benefit of absorption on a permanent basis. 2. The petitioners are part time contingent workers engaged by the 1st respondent. The seniority list of CLR workers are produced as Ext.P1. Ext.P2 is the order passed by the Government granting benefit to various contingent workers who are appointed on daily wage basis up to 31.12.1991 in various Municipalities. 3. The Government has directed to prepare a seniority list and to give preference to those persons who are eligible for various benefits as provided in Ext.P2. It appears that the 4th respondent and others approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.32179 of 2006 wherein this Court directed the Chairman of the Municipality to place the representation of the petitioners therein before the Council and to take a decision in the matter. Accordingly, Ext.P4 order has been passed, after the Council took a decision of 25.04.2008. wpc: 24329 of 2008 2 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing for the Municipality. The main challenge against Ext.P4 is that the seniority as provided in Ext.P1 has been overlooked in the case of the 4th petitioner. Further it is pointed out that the petitioners are yet to receive the benefit of the Ext.P2 government order. 5. The learned standing counsel for the Municipality submitted that the claim of the petitioners will be considered in terms of Ext.P2. It is pointed out by the standing counsel that between the issuance of Ext.P1 and 31.12.2000 many CLR workers have been employed and therefore, their claim also will have to be considered in accordance with seniority. What ever that be as the petitioners’ names have been included in Ext.P1, the name of the petitioners will be considered as per the specific stipulations provided in Ext.P2. If the petitioners are entitled for any assignment or regularization prior to a date on which the 4th respondent has been granted the benefit by Ext.P4, the same will be considered and appropriate action will be taken. Ext.P4 granting benefits to the 4th respondent will be subject to such orders to be passed by the Council afresh. Even though the 4th respondent was issued notice herein he has not disputed the wpc: 24329 of 2008 3 claim of the petitioners. The case of the petitioners will be placed before the Council within a period of two months and appropriate orders will be passed. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps