IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2009 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 29829 of 2008(A) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. M.K.MOHANAN, SLR WORKER, PWD ROADS SECTION, PIRAVOM. 2. KUNJAN KUMARAN, SLR WORKER, PWD ROADS SECTION, PIRAVOM. 3. T.D.MANI, SLR WORKER, PWD ROADS SECTION, PIRAVOM. 4. K.K.KRISHNANKUTTY, SLR WORKER, PWD ROADS SECTION, PIRAVOM. BY MR.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MR.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, MR. DIJO SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ADMINISTRATION), P.W.D, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PWD ROADS SECTION, PIRAVOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.29829/2008 A APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.106/85 PW&E (RELEVANT PAGES) DTD. 17/09/1985. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EE2-25399/98 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 21/10/2000. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A2.412/90 BY THE A.Ex.E., MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 15/11/2000. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EE2-25399/08 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 20/02/2001. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E2.8245/88 BY THE E.E.MUVATTUPUZHA DTD. 15/03/2001. EXT.P6: CIOPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.73/04 PWD DTD. 28/06/2004. EXT.P6(A): COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.24/07/PWD DTD. 19/03/2007. EXT.P7: CIOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 20/02/2008. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REMINDER LETTER DTD. 23/03/2008. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 10/04/2008. EXT.P10: COPY OF G.O.RT.NO.1200/08/PWD DTD. 28/07/2008. EXT.P11: COPY OF ORDER NO.TDR/PF25/EXPWD/37147/116 A ADMITTING 1ST PETITIONER TO GPF. DTD.4/1/2005. EXT.P11(A): COPY OF ORDER NO.TDR/PF25/EXPWD/37150/119 A ADMITTING 2ND PETITIONER TO GPF DTD. 4/01/2005. EXT.P11(B): COPY OF ORDER NO.TDR/PF25/EXPWD/37148/117.A ADMITTING 3RD PETITIONER TO GPF DTD. 4/01/2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss V.GIRI ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.29829 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners are working as SLR workers in the Public Works Department, Roads Section. According to them, they had entered service as CLR workers in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Malampuzha Roads Division on 6.3.1982, 1.12.198-, 1.7.1982 and 1.11.1982 respectively. Government by its order Ext.P1 dated 17.9.1985 laid down guidelines with regard to the absorption of CLR/SLR accepting the recommendation of the committee constituted in that regard as per Government order dated 30.08.1980 and considered the case of the SLR/CLR workers. Subsequently by Ext.P2 order dated 21.10.2000, petitioners 1 to 3 were absorbed as SLR workers. A perusal of Ext.P2 order will show that none of the petitioners had the requisite service to be absorbed as SLR workers, in terms of the Government order dated 20.1.1998. Nevertheless, they were absorbed as CLR workers. Subsequently, the government issued G.O.(MS)No.24/207 dated 19.3.2007 to W.P.(C)No.29829 of 2008 :: 2 :: extend all statutory benefits available to Class IV Government employees to the SLR workers also. Thereupon, the SLR workers prayed that such workers must be given pensionary benefits on a par with the regular employees. They filed Ext.P7 representation in this regard before the Government. Pursuant to Ext.P9 judgment, the Government considered their claim and rejected it as per Ext.P10. Ext.P10 is now challenged in this writ petition. 2. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the Government supporting Ext.P10. 3. The petitioners as SLR workers cannot either claim regularization or pensionary or other service benefits on a par with regular government employees. The petitioners have been absorbed in SLR service pursuant to an order issued in 1980. They cannot, as of right, claim parity in the matter of other service benefits with the regular employees. It is up to the Government, if they feel it appropriate and necessary, to confer any other benefit on SLR workers. W.P.(C)No.29829 of 2008 :: 3 :: The writ petition is dismissed, subject to the above observation. I make it clear that the judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioners, claiming any other benefits and moving the Government in that regard. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/- //true copy//