K.P.Manikantan vs The Chairman & Managing Director
2023 Latest Caselaw 323 Ker

W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015
                                      1



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 21ST POUSHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 25088 OF 2015
PETITIONER:

               K.P.MANIKANTAN
               AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.LATE P PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI,
               KUZHIMALA HOUSE, EDAPPALLY, COHIN - 682 024,
               (EX-EMPANELLED EMPLOYEE OF THE OFFICE OF THE
               DTO, KSRTC, ERNAKULAM DEPOT).

               BY ADV SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)


RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
            KSRTC, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

    2       THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION)
            KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
            TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

    3       THE ZONAL OFFICER
            CENTRAL ZONE , KSRTC, ERNAKULAM - 682 011.

    4       THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
            KSRTC, ERNAKULAM - 682 011.

            SRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC



        THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   11.01.2023,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015
                                    2



                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2023

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the

following reliefs:

"i) Call for the records leading to the case including the attendance registers kept at T & C section of the office of the 4th respondent for the period from 13.9.2005 onwards, regarding the attendance particulars of the petitioner;

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to re- admit the petitioner as provisional employee within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;

iii) Declare that the retrenchment of the petitioner from service is in violation of statutory provisions and in violation of the principles of natural justice;

iv) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to sanction and disburse the wages for 150 days additional duty which the petitioner had performed during his tenure;

v) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the illegal Ext.P7 order issued by the 1st respondent."

W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015

2. The case of the petitioner is that he has been working

as an empanelled employee in the ticket and cash section and

other sections of the office of the District Transport Officer,

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC), Ernakulam

with effect from 13.09.2005. It is the case of the petitioner

that the petitioner was appointed after an interview by the 3 rd

respondent and verifying his certificates. The Managing

Director of the KSRTC issued Exhibit P3 order with direction

to relieve all the permanent employees who were performing

other duties or light duties without the permission from the

Chief Office. According to the petitioner, petitioner, who was

an empanelled employee, was also removed from the service

in the light of Exhibit P3 order. It is further submitted that

wages from the KSRTC was the only source of livelihood for

the petitioner and his family.

3. That apart, it is contended that the petitioner has

submitted a representation when he was retrenched and

since no action was taken, he has approached this court by W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015

filing W.P.(C)No.35191 of 2014 and has secured Exhibit P7

judgment, whereby, the Managing Director was directed to

consider the representation. In accordance with the

directions, the Managing Director considered the

representation submitted by the petitioner and has passed

Exhibit P7 order dated 05.05.2015, which is impugned in this

writ petition.

4. In Exhibit P7 order it is clearly specified that the

petitioner has no indefeasible right to insist on re-induction

after unauthorised absence. It is also stated that casual

service of the petitioner was not satisfactory. Moreover, an

alternate person has been engaged by the Unit Officer in the

place of the petitioner.

5. The contention of the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the petitioner was retrenched without any

notice to him may not stand now because against the

retrenchment, the petitioner has submitted a representation

before the Managing Director and by virtue of the directions

issued by this court, the said representation was disposed of W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015

after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

6. In that view of the matter I do not think the petitioner

has made out any case of arbitrariness or illegality liable to be

interfered in a proceeding under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India.

7. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

that on account of the additional 150 duties done by the

petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to get wages for the

same. If any amounts are due to the petitioner on account of

the 150 duties, it is for the petitioner to submit suitable

application before the competent authority and if any such

application is filed, I have no reason to think that it will not be

considered in accordance with law and take a decision at the

earliest possible time, after providing an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner.

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

Shaji P. Chaly Judge vpv W.P.(C)No.25088 of 2015

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25088/2015

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXT.P1 THE COPY OF BANK STATEMENT - SBT ERNAKULAM BROADWAY BRANCH.

EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER DTD 9/11/2012.

EXT.P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE VOUCHER DTD 27/11/2012.

EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO PL-12-001722/14 DTD 30/5/2014

EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.PL1-2466/14/EKM DTD 31/5/2014.

EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD 19/11/2014

EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD 20/12/2014 IN WPC NO.35191/14.

EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.PL-1/000457/2015 DTD 5/5/2015.

EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF CHEQUE NO.921218 DTD 6/5/2014 FOR RS.9,000/- IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.

ECDS/PO/25/2008 DTD 27/3/2015 ISSUED BY UPAD CORPORATION OF KOCHI.

EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.128/15 DTD 19/1/2015 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAPPALLY NORTH.

EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN K.N.RAJAPPAN VS.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND OTHERS AS REPORTED IN 2013 LLR 1208.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE