IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6961 of 2011(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. NEESHMA.M.K., `PRABHAS' NEAR GHSS, THOTTADA, KANNUR-670 007. 2. BEENA.N.K., `NABANEETH', DHARMADOM P.O., SWAMIKUNNU, THALASSERRY-670 106. 3. SHAJITHA.T.V., `SREENILAYAM' MUTTANNUR, EDAYANNUR P.O., KANNUR-670 595. 4. UDAYAKUMAR.P., `SAROVARAM' ALAVIL P.O., ARAMKOTTAM, KANNUR-670 008. BY ADV. SRI.E.C.BINEESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF TEXTILES AND HANDLOOM DIRECTORATE OF TEXTILES AND HANDLOOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (HANTEX), P.B.NO.64, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 4. MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE KERALA STATE HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. (HANTEX), P.B.NO.64, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA, SC, HANTEX FOR R3 & 4 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 6961 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4. 2. Petitioners state that they are temporary workers attached to different depots of the 3rd respondent. It is stated that they are persons similarly situated to those covered by Ext.P5 and P6. Claiming similar benefit of regularization in the service of the 3rd respondent, petitioners have also filed Exts.P7 to P10 before the 3rd respondent and these applications are pending. In this writ petition, what they seek is a direction for the consideration of the aforesaid representations. 3. If as stated by the petitioners, they are persons similarly situated to the beneficiaries of Exts.P5 and P6, there is no reason why the representations shall not be considered. In that view of the matter, without expressing anything on the merits of the claim raised, I direct that the 3rd respondent shall consider Exts.P7 to P10. This the 3rd respondent shall do, as expeditiously WPC No. 6961/11 :2 : as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp