IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2009 / 25TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1607 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. K.P. WILSON, KOZHIKADEN HOUSE, KALLETTUMKARA P.O., THRISSUR (D). 2. A.F. RAPPAI, AINIKKAL HOUSE, OLLUR P.O., THRISSUR (D). 3. A.R. BABY, ARAKKAL HOUSE, VELUPADAM P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. RAJANS ANTONY M, MULLAKKARA HOUSE, PUDUKAD P.O., THRISSUR DIST. 5. T.SASIDHARAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, ALATHUR P.O., THRISSUR DIST. 6. K.C. PAULOSE, KANNAPPILLY HOUSE, THALORE P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. C.P. SURESH BABU, CHANDHANAKUDATH HOUSE, VASUPURAM, KADAKARA, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.DIPU.R SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (SIDCO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN FOR R1 SC – SHRI.R.T.PRADEEP FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th January,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are working in Ollur Service Workshop which is a unit of the 2nd respondent , Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation (SIDCO). Petitioners contend that they are termed as casual/piece rate workers and they have also been enrolled under the PF and ESI schemes by the management. The issue raised in this writ petition is one to regularise the petitioners in service. They are denied the said benefit which was granted in their favour as per Exhibit-P4 dated 26.9.2008. The Government have accorded sanction for regularisation of 27 piece rate workers as per the list appended to Exhibit- P4. Seeking for implementation of Exhibit, P4, they have approached respondents by filing Exhibit-P5. 2. Since the petitioners have already been included in annexure to Exhibit-P3 the order Exhibit P4 governs them also. It is for the 2nd respondent to take appropriate W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 2 action in the matter for implementation of Exhibit-P4. The 2nd respondent will therefore consider Exhibit-P5 and take action as directed in Exhibit-P4 and as requested by the petitioners in Exhibit-P5, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 4 (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 5 W.P ( C) No.1607 of 2009 6