Kerala High Court
Kannan. P.A vs State Of Kerala on 13 May, 2022
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 23RD VAISAKHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 29091 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 KANNAN. P.A.,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. LATE ANANDAN, MEKKATTU PARAMBU HOUSE,
KIZAKKEPRAM, ATHANI, N. PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM, PIN
683 513.
2 SETHU MANOHARAN P,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. LATE MANOHARAN, POKKATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
NAMBIATTUKUNNAM, N. PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM, PIN 683
513.
3 SHIBU MATHAI,
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. LATE MATHAI, THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KOTTAKKAPPALLY, PERUMPADANNA, N. PARAVUR,
ERNAKULAM, PIN 683 513.
4 DILEEP KUMAR K.G,
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. K. GOPALAN, KUMMAPPILLY HOUSE, THOITHARA,
N. PARAVU, ERNAKULAM, PIN 683 513
BY ADVS.
BABU KARUKAPADATH
M.A.VAHEEDA BABU
P.U.VINOD KUMAR
ARYA RAGHUNATH
VAISAKHI V.
T.M.MUHAMMED MUSTHAQ
MOHAMED HISHAM P
KARUKAPADATH WAZIM BABU
P.LAKSHMI
AISWARYA ANN JACOB
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695
001
2 SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF- GOVERNMENT,
W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021
-2-
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695
001
3 THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS,
DIRECTORATE OF URBAN AFFAIRS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
4 PARAVUR MUNICIPALITY,
MUNICIPAL JUNCTION, MAIN ROAD, NORTH PARAVUR,
PIN 683 513, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
5 THE SECRETARY,
PARAVUR MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL JUNCTION, MAIN
ROAD, NORTH PARAVUR, PIN 683 513.
BY ADV ANOOP.V.NAIR
OTHER PRESENT:
GP VENUGOPAL V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
15.03.2022, THE COURT ON 13.05.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021
-3-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of May, 2022 The petitioners were engaged as casual labourers for doing sanitation works in the fourth respondent Municipality with effect from 01.05.2013, 01.05.2017, 08.05.2017 and 21.05.2017 respectively. While so, on 30.11.2021, the petitioners were informed that they need not report for duty from 01.12.2021 onwards. According to the petitioners, the attempt of the Municipality is to replace them with another batch of casual labourers. Relying on the decision in Hameshdas K.H and others v. The State of Kerala and others [2021(3) ILR (Ker.) 456], the petitioners contend that being CLR workers, they are entitled for regularisation. In the writ petition, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs;
"(i) Issue of a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or direction commanding the respondents 4 and 5 to continue to engage the W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -4- petitioners as Casual Labourers and to take immediate steps to regularise them in service.
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or direction commanding the respondents, not to terminate the service of the petitioners and to regularise them in service of the 4th respondent by following the procedure laid down by this Hon'ble Court in 2021 (3) ILR (Kerl) 456.
(iii) Direct the 4th and 5th respondents to permit the petitioners to participate in the selection, if at all the 4th respondent intends to conduct fresh selection, to select persons to replace the petitioners, by permitting the petitioners to continue till the selection process is completed."
2. Adv.M.A.Vaheedha Babu, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that, while the Municipal Council discontinued the service of the petitioners, their juniors are allowed to continue. It is submitted that various other Municipalities and Corporations having taken steps to regularise the service of casual labourers, the fourth respondent is also bound to initiate such action in the light of the decision W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -5- in Hameshdas and others.
3. Learned Counsel for the 4th respondent Municipality submitted that 40 permanent sanitation workers and 7 substitute sanitation workers recruited through Employment Exchange are carrying out the sanitation works in the Municipality. Earlier, vide resolution dated 2.03.2013, the Municipal Council had approved the recommendations of the Health Standing Committee to hire temporary/contract workers on CLR basis. The petitioners were appointed on the basis of the said decision and were allowed to continue in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic and related issues. Taking into account the financial difficulty faced by the Municipality and reduction in the workload of sanitation workers, the fourth respondent Municipality, as per resolution No.12 dated 20.11.2021, had decided to disengage the CLR workers and not to engage any temporary/contract employees in their place. Consequently, on 01.12.2021, the petitioners were W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -6- informed about the decision and requested not to report for duty. It is submitted that the Municipality is having sufficient number of permanent sanitation workers and substitute sanitation workers appointed through Employment Exchange for meeting its sanitation requirements. It is contended that having been relieved and the post of CLR workers abolished, the petitioners cannot aspire for regularisation on the strength of the judgment in Hameshdas.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that, after disengaging the petitioners, the respondent Municipality has appointed other sanitation workers and hence, the submissions made on behalf of the Municipality lack bona fides.
5. Learned Standing Counsel clarified that, persons engaged after relieving the petitioners are substitute sanitation workers appointed through the Employment Exchange.
6. Indisputably the petitioners, who were W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -7- engaged on temporary/contractual basis, were disengaged with effect from 01.12.2021. The disengagement is based on resolution No.12 of the Municipal Council dated 20.11.2021. The said resolution is not under challenge in this writ petition. Moreover, the decision was taken in view of the adverse financial condition of the Municipality and reduction in sanitation works due to subsiding of the surge in Covid cases.
7. The fact that after disengaging the petitioners, the Municipality has appointed sanitary workers through Employment Exchange will not give rise to a fresh cause of action for the petitioners. As contended by the Standing Counsel, as per the directives of the Government, engagement of casual workers can only be through Employment Exchange.
8. The decision in Hameshdas was rendered in the context of the petitioners therein, who were workers included in the Daily Labour Rolls (DLR) of the Thrissur Corporation, having W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -8- continued in service for more than a decade and the Corporation itself having sought the Government's permission to regularise their service. The petitioners' case being entirely different, Hameshdas cannot be relied on for compelling this court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Municipality to regularise the service of the petitioners.
For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN JUDGE Scl/ W.P.(C) No.29091 of 2021 -9- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29091/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY TO THE 1ST PETITIONER , EVIDENCING THAT HE IS WORKING AS CASUAL LABOURERS UNDER IT.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY TO THE 2ND PETITIONER, EVIDENCING THAT HE IS WORKING AS CASUAL LABOURERS UNDER IT.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY TO THE 3RD PETITIONER, EVIDENCING THAT HE IS WORKING AS CASUAL LABOURERS UNDER ITS.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY TO THE 4TH PETITIONER , EVIDENCING THAT HE IS WORKING AS CASUAL LABOURERS UNDER IT.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 2.3.2022 RECEIVED FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT MUNICIPALITY UNDER THE RTI ACT.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 2.2.2022 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN CONTEMPT CASE NO-213/2022 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 2.3.2022 SUBSEQUENTLY FILED BY T HE 5TH RESPONDENT IN CONTEMPT CASE NO- 213/2022 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURE.