IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2009 / 23RD ASWINA 1931 WA.No. 1856 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.10003/2004 Dated 23/01/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------------- 1. SRI.T.A.DIVAKARAN,THAZHATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNJITHANNI.P.O., VIA.CHITHIRA PURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SRI..M.J.CHACKO, MUNDACKAL HOUSE,MOOLAMATTOM.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. SRI.P.S.MOHAMMED HANEEFA, PANACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE,KANJAR.P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. R.GOPINATHA PILLAI,PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, ELLAKKAL.P.O.,IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. SRI.K.R.GOPALAN,KOTTANCHIRA HOUSE, MEENKUNNAM.P.O.,MUVATTUPUZHA. 6. SRI.A.S.BALAN,AMIKKAT HOUSE, KANIRAMATTOM,THODUPUZHA EAST.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 7. SRI.K.A.ABDU VAHAB, KANDATHIL HOUSE, KANJAR.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 8. SRI. TOMY JOSEPH,PERIKONIL HOUSE, MARIKA P.O.,KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM 9. SRI.C.K.GOPI, CHELAKKALPARYIL HOUSE, TOOKKKUPARA.P.O.,IDUKKI DISTRICT 10. SRI.K.N.RAJU, KANJIRATHINGAL HOUSE, MULLAKKANAM, ELLAKKAL.P.O.,IDUKKI DSTRICT 11. SRI.T.A.GOPI, THAZHATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNJITHANNI.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 12. SRI.T.P.VARGHESE, THAZHATHEKKUDIYIL HOUSE, RAJAKKAD.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 13. SRI.LALU, KIZHAKKEL VEEDU, KUTHUMKAL.P.O., RAJAKKAD, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 14. SRI.K.N.RAMANAN,KIZHAKKEPURATHUKUDY, VALIAKANDAM, RAJAKKAD.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 15. SRI.V.R.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, VETTUKALLUMPURATH HOUSE, RAJAKKAD.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 16. SRI.M.RADHAKRISHNAN, MATTAPPALLIL VEEDU, KUNJITHANNI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 17. SRI.M.K.RAVI, MEKEMALATH HOUSE, ANAVERITTY.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 18. SRI.P.J.KURIAN, PLATHOTATHIL HOUSE, ARAKKULAM.P.O., ASOKA KAVALA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. SRI.VARGHESE JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, (FORMERLY MAZDOOR, K.S.E.BOARD), MUNDACKAPADAVIL VEEDU, KUDAYATHOOR, VIA.THODUPUZHA,-685 590. 2. SRI.P.P.SARASAN ASARI, (FORMERLY MAZDOOR K.S.E.BOARD), PUTHENPURAYIL VEEDU, KANJAR-685 592, VIA.THODUPUZHA. 3. SRI.K.P.MOHANAN PILLAI, S/O.PRABHAKARAN PILLAI, (FORMERLY MAZDOOR K.S.E.BOARD),KALLAMMAKKEL, KUDAYATHOOR-685 590. 4. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BOARD SECRETARIAT, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SECRETARY, BOARD SECRETARIAT,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 6. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENY GERVASIS ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB FOR R4,5 SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE FOR R1,2,3 SMT.P.V.PARVATHI FOR R1,2,3 SMT.REENA THOMAS FOR R1,2,3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/10/2009 ALONG WITH W.A.NO.2075/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JJ ------------------------------------------ W.A.Nos.1856 of 2009, 1989 of 2009 and 2075 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October,2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph.J Appellants are not parties to this writ petition. But it cannot be disputed that they are parties to the lis. The writ petition was filed praying for regularisatoin as electricity workers in KSEB. Going by the voluminous size of the case bundle itself it is fairly clear that the case has a checkered history of for more than 3 ½ decades. As rightly pointed out by the counsel for appellant finding it difficult to continue the litigation for more than 3 ½ decades, apparently at some stage despite their right to fight and get the relief, some of them thought it fit to leave the fight. Normally, many will not be able to carry forward a fight for more than 3 ½ decades. It appears that there were three persons who could afford to continue to fight. It is significant to note that there were 2000 claimants originally. After some stage only 755 remained and still farther only 85 survived and in the case of those 85 there appears to be no serious dispute that they are all similarly situated. But as W.A.Nos.1856 of 2009,1989 of 2009 and 2075 of 2009 2 rightly pointed by the standing counsel for the Electricity Board, among those 85, when discontinued from service only 3 took up the fight before this court. The learned single judge after elaborately referring to the background of the litigation, allowed the writ petition directing regularisation in the case of three writ petitioners. We are informed that the judgment has been implemented. While allowing the writ petition it is seen that learned single judge has travelled beyond the scope of the writ petition and has issued a direction that such a relief need not be granted to others even if they are similarly situated. 2. We are afraid that such a direction could not have been issued by the learned single judge for many reasons. No court can shut out the legal right of any citizen, more so when that person is not before the court, to approach the court for redressing his grievances. Whether the court would grant relief or not depends on so many factors both legal and factual. Now that the legal right has been conceded, we do not find any justification why the case of persons who claim to be similarly situated cannot be directed to be W.A.Nos.1856 of 2009,1989 of 2009 and 2075 of 2009 3 considered by the Electricity Board. Accordingly we vacate the directions contained in the judgment under appeal pertaining to those who are not before this court and dispose of the writ appeals directing the Electricity Board to consider the case of the writ appellants in the light of the action taken in the case of the writ petitioners. The needful as above shall be done within a period of 2 months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE ssn