High Court of KeralaWP(C)/16196/2007disposed of

S.Gopi v. Union Of India And Others

2015-02-234 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/4TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 16196 of 2007 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

-------------------------- S.GOPI, THEKKEKANJIYIL VEEDU, KADAMPANADU SOUTH, MANAMPUZHA P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADVS.SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS :

----------------------------

1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI.

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM.

3. STATE PROJECT OFFICER, (SSA), KERALA, D.P.E.P., 4TH FLOOR CORPORATION BUILDING, PALAYALAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4. DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER, S.S.A.(SARVA SIKSHA ABHIYAN), KOLLAM.

5. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM.

6. PRIMARY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT, SOCIETY OF KERALA (PEDSK) THIRUVANANTHAPURTAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

7. THE BLOCK PROGRAMME OFFICER, SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM.

R2,3,5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ABHIJETT LESSIL R1 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, CGC SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASGI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 16196 of 2007 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.9.2003 EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE DT.7.10.97 EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P. 14903/2007 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P.15785/2007 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE AV

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.16196 of 2007 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a Peon working on daily wages as per Ext.P1 appointment order in the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA), which is a joint project of the Central and State Governments. The petitioner has filed this writ petition apprehending termination from service. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is a member of the Scheduled Caste. The petitioner has sought the following reliefs : a. Declare that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till the successful completion of the Sarvasiksha Abhiyan project and their services are no liable to be terminated for accommodating others.

b. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order directing them to produce the rules/regulations/guidelines/norms relation the service conditions of the employees engaged in Sarvasiksha Abhiyan project.

c. To issue a writ of prohibition any or any or other appropriate order or direction restraining the respondents from terminating the service of the petitioner for the purpose of accommodating other temporary hands and without issuing any written order.

d. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in service till the completion of the Sarvasiksha Abhiyan project.

e. Grant such other relief that are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

W.P.(C) No.16196 of 2007

2. This writ petition was admitted on 29.05.2007. At the time of admission, the following interim order has been issued. "Admit. Issue Notice.

If the services of daily wage Peons are required in the office of the 7th respondent, the petitioner shall be preferred to fresh daily rated hands. But, this will not stand in the way of appointing regular/Employment Exchange hands." The said interim order is still in force.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 contending that the petitioner is only a temporary employee and that he cannot claim to continue for ever.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over to me the judgment dated 17.06.2011 in W.P.(C).No.15844/2007 by which, the claim of a similar petitioner has been disposed of maintaining the interim order. I do not find any grounds to deny the same relief to the petitioner herein also.

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order reproduced hereinabove.

Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.