Decided on September 09,1974

K.K. Sivasankaran Nair Appellant


P.GOVINDAN NAIR, C.J. - (1.) THE identical question arises for determination in the original petition as well as the writ appeal. We, therefore, propose to dispose of the two eases by a common judgment.
(2.) THE petitioner in O.P. No. 2495 of 1971 and the first respondent in W.A. 346/73 were appointed in the Labour Department of the State as Welfare Assistants. In the year 1966 the State Government decided to abolish 39 posts of Welfare Assistants in the department and ordered accordingly. Consequently the petitioner in the O.P. and the first respondent in the writ appeal ceased to be Welfare Assistants. The relevant part of the order is seen from Ext. P 2 in the original petition. We shall extract two paragraph from that order In the G.O. read above it was ordered that 39 posts of Welfare Assistants on Rs. 40 -120 (pre -revision scale) working in the Labour Department would be abolished. In pursuance of this G.O. the Labour Commissioner furnished to Government a list of the 39 Welfare Assistants in the order of seniority as Welfare Assistants with their service particulars to be displaced from the Labour Department copy of which is attached to this order). In the Government memorandum read above the Government have directed all the heads of departments and offices to report vacancies of posts with similar qualifications for absorbing these candidates. Sufficient number of vacancies have now been reported in the departments/offices noted below. The Government are, therefore, pleased to absorb all the 39 retrenched Welfare Assistants whose service particulars are shown in the Annexure to this order is the reported vacancies of L.D. clerks on Rs. 80 -160 in the various departments/offices as shown below:Existing No. Name of persons Department/Officersof vacancies allotted to which allotted11 Advocate 1. Sri. T.J. Joseph In the various offices under the2. Sri. K. Appai Distriot Collector, Ernakulam.3. Sri. K K. Sivasankaran Nair4. Sri. N.C. Elias5. Sri. K Mohammed Ali6. Sri. P.T. Vakkan7. Sri. K Narayana Pillai8. Sri. K. R. Narayanan9. Smt. Bhagavathy Ammal10. Sri. M.D. Prabhakaran11. Sri. K.N. Sukumaran Nair3 1. Sri. K..V. Pathrobe Chief Engineer, (Buildings and2. Sri. P.V Karunakaran Roads).3. Sri. P.S. Sivan Pillai15 1. Sri. K.K. Azhakan Civil Supplies Branch under2. Sri. A V. Kunjukunju the District Collector, Trichur.3. Sri. P.S. Syed Hassan Sahib4. Sri. A.N. Gangadhara Kurup5. Smt. P. Manorama6. Sri. T.T. Joseph7. Sri. P.A. Abraham8. Sri. M.S. Raman9. Sri. R. Mohan Kumar10. Sri. Abraham Titus11. Sri. Varghese Varkey12. Sri. M.R. Raghavan13. Sri. V. Sathyanatha Menon14. Sri. A. Sahadevan15. Sri. M. Abdul Samad Kunju2 1. Sri. Padmasanan In the office of the Comman -2. Sri. N.K. Sankaran dant General, Home Guards.2 1. Sri. V. Ganapathy Iyer In the office of the Labour2. Sri. K. Vasudevan Pillai Commissioner.6 1. Sri. V. Hamza Under the District Collector,2. Sri. T.K. Mohammed Kozhikode.3. Sri. K.K. Chandran4. Sri. E.P. Sivadasan5. Sri. T. Immanual William6. Sri. K. Balakrishnan Nair The two persons thereafter took up the appointments which where assigned to them under that order. There were three other Welfare Assistants at the time it was decided to abolish the 39 posts. They were originally recruited as clerks in the Labour Department and it appears they were appointed by transfer as Welfare Assistants. It is not clear from the pleadings whether as clerks they bad been confirmed before they were appointed by transfer as Welfare Assistants. Prior to 1961 there were no Special Rules applicable to the Kerala Labour Subordinate Service. The petitioner in the O.P. was appointed by direct recruitment as Welfare Assistant as early as 1957 and so was the first respondent in the writ appeal.
(3.) THREE clerks referred to above and who were working as Welfare Assistants tiled a writ application O.P. No. 3614 of 1966 before this Court claiming that they should be re appointed as clerks in the Labour Department on certain subsequent vacancies arising in the Labour Department. They had so represented to the State Government before filing the writ petition and in the counter -affidavit filed by the State to the original petition it was averred that those representations were under the active consideration of the State Government Counsel for the petitioners at the time of hearing submitted that they would be satisfied with a direction that those representations be dealt with by the Government and appropriate orders passed. Such a direction was, therefore, issued in the original petition. The Government thereafter passed an order on 22.2.69 directing that the three petitioners in O.P. No. 3614 of 1966 be appointed as clerks in the Labour Department assigning them their original seniority in that cadre in that department and they had been thereafter by orders Exts. P. 3 and P. 3(a) produced in the writ appeal posted as Assistant Labour Officers. Isaac, J., in dealing with the original petition moved by the first respondent in the writ appeal directed that the Government should consider whether the same procedure should not be followed in the case of the first respondent by the judgment under appeal in the writ appeal.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.