Wednesday, 15, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Omana K.R vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 211 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 211 Ker
Judgement Date : 5 January, 2021

Kerala High Court
Omana K.R vs State Of Kerala on 5 January, 2021
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

    TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 15TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.112 OF 2021(L)

PETITIONER:
              OMANA K.R
              AGED 60 YEARS
              W/O. LATE KRISHNANKUTTY, KIZHAKKEKALAYIL,
              KUMARANALLOOR P.O. KOTTAYAM.

              BY ADVS.
              SHRI.P.M.JOSHI
              SMT.SIJI K.PAUL

RESPONDENTS:
       1     STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH AND
             FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT , SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      2       SUPERINTENDENT,
              MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL,
              GANDHINAGAR P.O., KOTTAYAM 686 008.


OTHER PRESENT:

              GP- SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.112 OF 2021

                                    2

                            JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ or declaration quashing Exhibit-P10 as the same is illegal and against the Exhibit P11 government order.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or direction to the first and second respondents to consider P7 and P8 representations respectively and pass orders after hearing the petitioner and other similarly placed employees.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or direction to the respondents to retain the petitioner till a final decision is taken on Exhibit P7 and P8 representations.

(iv) Set aside Government letter K3/118/2017 H&FW Department dated 28.11.2017 mentioned in Exhibit P2, being issued against the principles of natural justice."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the petitioner is a contingent employee

working in the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam under the

Hospital Development Committee and that she has been WP(C).No.112 OF 2021

required to go out of service on attaining the age of 60

years. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the age of retirement of contingent employee under the

Government service is 70 years and Ext.P11 would show

that contingent employees employed on a contract basis

under the projects funded by the RSBY can continue in

service until 65 years of age. The petitioner contends that

she has approached the respondents submitting

representation seeking continuance in service. However, she

is not permitted to continue in service on the basis that she

has attained the age of 60 years.

4. Having heard the learned Government Pleader

also, I am of the opinion that the issue with regard to

retirement age of contingent employees working under the

Hospital Development Committee is a matter, which has to

be considered by the Government in accordance with law.

5. There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 1 st

respondent to consider the representation preferred by the

petitioner and to take an appropriate decision with regard to WP(C).No.112 OF 2021

the same, taking note of the contentions raised by the

petitioner as well. The petitioner shall produce a copy of

Ext.P8 representation along with the copy of this judgment

and the writ petition before the 1 st respondent for

compliance. The 1st respondent shall hear the petitioner

through any appropriate means including video conferencing

and pass orders within a period of two months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, the

petitioner shall be permitted to continue in service as a

contingent employee.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE Bng/05.01.2020 WP(C).No.112 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 THE PHOTOCOPY OF IDENTIFY CARD ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2017 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TERMINATING SERVICES OF 20 EMPLOYEES.

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O. (P) 12-831/80 (253) FIN DATED 3.11.1980 OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVT. ORDER DATED 5.3.2016.

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF PETITIONER'S PASS BOOK.

EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.12.2020 SUBMITTED TO 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 26.12.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE HEATH MINISTER, STATE OF KERALA.

EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.12.2020 IN WP(C) NO. 26876/202

EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAID G.O.(RT)NO.

2466/2018/H&FWD DATED 2.8.2018.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter