Kerala High Court
A.M.Mohanan vs State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013/16TH MAGHA 1934
WP(C).No. 33450 of 2008 (F)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------
A.M.MOHANAN, ELLUKALAYIL HOUSE,
PUTHUPPALLY PO, KOTTAYAM.
BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. COMMISSIONER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, L.M.S. CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
3. DIRECTOR, P.A.U. (THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR)
KOTTAYAM.
4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, P.A.U., KOTTAYAM.
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ALOYSIUS THOMAS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
05-02-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 33450 of 2008 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
EXT. P1 COPY OF THE LETTER D.O.NO.44326/C1/2002/RD ISSUED BY THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
AND HOUSING DATED 5.11.2002.
EXT. P2 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.26974/K4/2002 DATED 25.9.2002 ISSUED
BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.
EXT. P3 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A1/2964/84 DATED 25.2.2005 OF THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.
EXT. P4 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D-1004/87 DATED 19.1.2006 ISSUED BY THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR.
EXT. P5 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) NO.70/2006/LSGD DATED 1.3.2006
EXT. P6 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) NO.100/2006/LSGD DATED
16.5.2006
EXT. P7 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) NO.169/2007/LSGD DATED
29.6.2007
EXT. P8 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
INSTITUTIONS DATED 5.7.2007.
EXT. P9 COPY OF THE INTIMATION NO.6143/08/M (LSG) ISSUED FROM THE
OFFICE OF THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR LOCAL ADMINISTRATION.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
EXT. R1(A) GOVT. LR.NO.32100/I.B.1/2007/LSGD DATED 31.10.2007.
/TRUE COPY/
P. A. TO JUDGE
Pn
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.
------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 33450 of 2008
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of February, 2013
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a Driver working on daily wage basis in the 'Poverty Alleviation Unit' (formerly known as the District Rural Development Authority - DRDA) under the respondents. He was working as daily wage driver in a project under the DRDA, since the year 1999 onwards. He had previous temporary service as driver at various departments like, District Court, Kottayam, District Nirmithi Kendra, District Planning Office, District Panchayat Office and in the Offices of the Sub Collector and R.D.O., Kottayam. According to the petitioner, he had rendered meritorious services during calamities occurred like, Kumarakom Boat Tragedy and the Tsunami effected, for which the Government had given appreciation. Issue involved is regarding claim for regularisation of the petitioner. Petitioner had produced various orders as per Exhibits P3 to P7 which reveals that persons working on temporary basis in W.P.(C). No. 33450 of 2008 -2- DRDA's in different Districts were absorbed into regular service through orders issued by the District Collectors concerned, and also through orders issued from Local Self Government Department of the State Government. But representation submitted by the petitioner, to the then Minister for Local Self Government Department, evident from Exhibit P8, was not considered. Hence this writ petition was filed.
2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent it is mentioned that a representation submitted by the petitioner through the local M.L.A. was rejected through Exhibit R1(a) letter issued by the Government, addressed to the M.L.A. On a perusal of Exhibit R1(a), it is evident that the request was rejected through a cryptic order saying that it is not possible to regularise the appointment under the prevailing rules. However, statement in the counter affidavit to the effect that, the regularisation granted to temporary drivers working in the W.P.(C). No. 33450 of 2008 -3- Poverty Alleviation Unit were on specific reasons as enumerated in those orders.
3. It is true that, there is no specific right conferred on the petitioner to claim regularisation on the basis of the temporary service rendered. But at the same time the petitioner is entitled to be treated on an equal basis with similarly situated persons, who were already regularised in service. There cannot be any discrimination in the matter of policy decision of the Government or in the matter of exercising its discretion. In the case at hand, the petitioner had produced Exhibits P3 to P7 orders which will indicate that drivers working in the Poverty Alleviation Unit and in the former DRDA were regularised in the Department by virtue of different orders issued by the District Collector as well as by the Government. Whether any specific reason to discriminate the petitioner and to deny similar treatment is a matter which need examination. Hence, I am of the view that a consideration of the request of the petitioner taking W.P.(C). No. 33450 of 2008 -4- note of the policy adopted in the matter of similarly situated other persons is necessary to meet the ends of justice.
4. Under the above mentioned circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a detailed representation before the 1st respondent producing all relevant documents to substantiate his claim. If any such representation is received by the 1st respondent the same shall be considered and appropriate decision shall be taken, after affording a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Representation if any received shall be disposed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the same.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE /True copy/ P. A. to Judge Pn