IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2011/20TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 16408 of 2010 (A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHAJI GEORGE.V., S/O. VARKEY, VADASSERI, KALLURUTYY.P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.V.NEEMA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, PARK VIEW, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JOINT DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-20. 3. MANAGER, GOVERNMENT GUEST HOUSE, WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A.K.JOHN (TOURISM) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-11-2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.16408/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1:- COPY OF THE APPRENTICESHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- R1(a):- COPY OF THE ORDER. R1(b):- COPY OF THE G.O. (MS) NO.214/05/GAD DT. 27.6.2005. R1(c):- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 8.6.2010. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE tss C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 16408 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was engaged as 'Hospitality Assistant' on daily wage basis by the 3rd respondent in the Government Guest House, Kozhikode, from April 2008 onwards. According to the petitioner his engagement was terminated without assigning any reason or without issuing any notice. The petitioner complaints that the 3rd respondent had shown illegal discrimination by retaining other persons engaged along with petitioner who are stated to be unqualified. Further allegation is that the 3rd respondent is retaining other temporary hands in the post without permitting continued engagement of the petitioner, for no valid reasons. Under such circumstances the petitioner seeks direction to the 3rd respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Hospitality Assistant till any regular hand is appointed through Public Service Commission. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is contended that the persons engaged on daily wage basis are not in the continuous service. The petitioner was engaged only for 29 or 27 days in each month. Exhibit R1 (a) is W.P.(c) No.16408/2010 -2- produced to show that such appointment is made on a monthly basis for specified number of days. It is further contended that the method and eligibility for appointment to the post of 'Hospitality Assistant' is prescribed through Ext.R1 (b) Government order and the qualification prescribed therein is a 'Craft Certificate in Food and Beverage Service' from any Government Food Craft Institute or any other qualification recognized by Government as equivalent thereto. It is specifically stated that the petitioner has not acquired the prescribed qualification. The counter affidavit also mention about some complaints received from guests, against the petitioner and also about a report obtained in this regard from the Manager of the Guest House. However, it is stated that the total number of posts in the cadre of Hospitality Assistant in the Guest House is six. Four posts are filled up with regular employees. It is also refuted that two unqualified persons working on daily wage basis. According to respondents those two persons are engaged prior to the date of engagement of the petitioner. Since the petitioner is the juniormost person engaged on daily wages he was disengaged since the PSC hands have joined duty. W.P.(c) No.16408/2010 -3- 3. From the facts and circumstances as well as the rival contentions, it is evident that the engagement of the petitioner was on daily wage basis which is purely provisional. Such engagement will not give raise for any statutory claim for continuance of service. Further, the facts stated in the counter affidavit enumerate reasonable and justifiable causes for not affording continued engagement for the petitioner on daily wage basis. 4. Hence I find no legal reason subsisting to interfere in the matter, warranting issuance of any direction, as sought for. Therefore, the writ petition deserves no merit and the same is dismissed. Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. AMG True copy P.A to Judge