K.P. Joshil v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2015/2ND CHAITHRA, 1937 WA.No. 684 of 2015 () IN WP(C).23778/2011 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23778/2011 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 27-02-2015 APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS 2 & 3:
-------------------------------------------------------
1. K.P. JOSHIL KAAPINKARA, AZHIKKODE SOUTH P.O.
2. K.MUKESH KALLEN HOUSE, PAPPINSSERY WEST P.O.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH SMT.BINDUMOL JOSEPH SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY FOR CULTURAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. KERALA FOLKLORE ACADEMY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHIRACKAL P.O.
PUTHIYATHERU - 670 011.
3. SECRETARY KERALA FOLKLORE ACADEMY, CHIRACKAL P.O.
PUTHIYAHERU - 670 011.
4. SRI. P.K.ABDUL RAHMAN, PEON, KERALA FOLKLORE ACADEMY, CHIRACKAL P.O. PUTHIYATHERU - 670 011.
5. O.V.SUVARNAN KERALA FOLKLORE ACADEMY, CHIRACKAL P.O.
PUTHIYATHERU KANNUR, RESIDING AT ODAN VALAPPIL THALUVIL, PARASSINIKKADAVU P.O - 670 563.
R2 & R3 BY SRI.T.K.AJITH KUMAR BY SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) R1 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-03-2015 ALONG WITH WA NO.689/15, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC & ALEXANDER THOMAS, JJ.
=============================== Writ Appeal Nos.684 & 689 of 2015 ======================== Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2015
J U D G M E N T
Antony Dominic, J.
These writ appeals arise from the judgment in WP(C) Nos.23778/11 and 13111/14 respectively. Appellants were working as temporary hands in the category of Lower Division Typist and Lower Division Clerk in the Kerala Folklore Academy. While, they were continuing in service, Folklore Academy initiated steps for regular appointment. When they were threatened with termination, they filed the writ petitions essentially claiming regularization in service. Learned single Judge declined the prayer, but directed that they shall be permitted to continue in service until regular hands join service. It is this judgment, which is under challenge. 2.
We heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Government Pleader, the learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3 and also the learned counsel appearing for the party respondents.
3.
Admittedly, the appointment of the appellants were not regular, but temporary, pending regular recruitment. Such
WA Nos.684 & 689/15 : 2 :
appointees do not have any vested right to continue in service beyond the period of their appointment or to claim regularisation in service. The maximum they could have asked for is to allow them to continue till regular hands join service. The learned single Judge has rightly declined the prayer of regularisation and has given maximum relief by permitting them to continue until regular hands join duty. It is informed by the learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3 that regular hands joined duty from 16/3/15. In such circumstances, we are unable to find any illegality in the view taken by the learned single Judge in entertaining these writ petitions.
4.
In so far as WA No.689/15 is concerned, they have also a grievance that their names were not sponsored by the Employment Exchange. However, from the statement filed on behalf of the Employment Officer, it is evident that the name of the appellants were not sponsored for the reason that there were candidates who were senior to them and it was those senior candidates who were sponsored against the requisition made by
WA Nos.684 & 689/15 : 3 :
the appointing authority. Therefore, the appellants could not have sought any order from this Court.
Writ appeals are dismissed.
Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge