Kerala High Court
T.S .Jayachandran vs State Of Kerala Represented By The Chief ... on 4 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 14TH POUSHA, 1945
W.P.(C) NO.44349 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
T.S. JAYACHANDRAN, AGED 54 YEARS, K.SANKARAN,
(PEN NO.G32124), CONDUCTOR GR.II, KSRTC, VITHURA DEPOT AND
RESIDING AT THEKKEVELIYIL, KAITHAVANA,
SANATHANAPURAM P.O, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 003
BY ADVS.
N.UNNIKRISHNAN
JAYACHANDRAN C.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001
2 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR
3 THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION),
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORTBHAVAN,
EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 023
4 THE DISTRICT OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM NORTH,
NEDUMANGAD, PIN - 695 541
5 THE INSPECTOR IN CHARGE OF ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VITHURA DEPOT,
VITHURA, PIN - 695 551
BY ADV DEEPU THANKAN, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
W.P.(C)No. 44349 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Dated: 4th January, 2024)
The petitioner has approached this court against the denial of
employment and for quashing Exts.P1 and P10.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the service
of the 2nd respondent as a conductor on 04.08.2000 at Alappuzha
Depot. His service was regularized as per order dated 19.03.2015, and the
regularization was on the basis of G.O.(MS) No.78/2011/TRAN dated
22.12.2011. Regularization was ordered for those employees who had put
in eight (8) years of service with 120 duties per year. On the basis of the
judgment of the Apex Court in 2018, the pre-condition for regularization
was modified as 10 years of service with 120 duties per year. Thereafter,
the petitioner's regularization was cancelled as per Ext.P1 order. The
petitioner, along with a few other employees, challenged the cancellation
of regularization before this Court in W.P.(C)No.16405 of 2018 and
connected cases, and by judgment dated 16.08.2022, this court disposed
of the writ petition directing the respondents to re-consider the same.
3. The case put forward by the petitioner is that without
complying with the directions issued by this court and without giving the
opportunity of hearing, the 2nd respondent has passed the order holding
that the petitioner could not produce any document to show that he has
actually worked for 120 duties in a year as on 21.12.2011 and have
completed 10 years of service.
4. Heard Sri.N.Unnikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner,
and Sri.Deepu Thankan, learned standing counsel for the respondents.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed
the prayer, stating that Ext. P1 was issued on 11.09.2023 and Ext. P10 on
04.10.2023 and, therefore, there is delay and latches on the part of the
petitioner in approaching this court and, therefore, not entitled to any
relief.
6. A perusal of Ext.P4 common judgment would make it clear that
the corporation was directed to give the opportunity to the petitioners to
verify the contents of the service books, voucher of payment, attendance
register, check sheet register, cash counter register, rack issue register,
etc., to prove that they have completed 120 duties per year up to
21.12.2011. As per the directions, contained in Clause (c) of paragraph 21
of the judgment of this court in W.P.(C)No.28461 of 2018 and connected
cases, the respondents ought to have given access to the documents in the
possession of the corporation,
7. It is further made clear that the said direction was not
complied with, as Ext.P13 memorandum is issued on 25.10.2023. It directs
all district officers/Unit officers to allow employees like the petitioner to
have access to the documents in possession of the corporation to verify
them to prove that they have worked for 10 years and completed 120
duties per year. Therefore, it is evident that the petitioner was not given
the opportunity as stated in Ext P4. Therefore, Exts.P1 and P10 cannot
stand in the eye of the law and, therefore, are quashed.
In the result, there will be a direction to the competent authority to
re-consider the matter strictly in accordance with the judgment of this
court in W.P.(C)No.28461 of 2018, and connected cases and appropriate
orders shall be passed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall be allowed to continue till
final orders are passed, in the post where he is now continuing.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
BASANT BALAJI,
JUDGE
ss
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 44349/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.PL16/004985/2017 (A
& V A2) DATED 11.09.2023 ISSUED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.PL
12/025739/39/2008 DATED 19.03.2015
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF INTERIM STAY ORDER DATED
03.09.2018 IN W.P.(C) NO.16405/2018
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 16.08.2022 IN
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF BREAK UP DETAILS OF ATTENDANCE
FOR THE PERIOD FROM 14.08.2000 TO 30.12.2000
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF BREAK UP DETAILS OF ATTENDANCE
FOR THE PERIOD FROM 11.02.2001 TO 28.08.2001
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF BREAK UP DETAILS OF ATTENDANCE
FOR THE PERIOD FROM 02.01.2002 TO 28.12.2002
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF BREAK UP DETAILS OF ATTENDANCE
FOR THE PERIOD FROM 07.01.2003 TO 29.12.2003
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF BREAK UP DETAILS OF ATTENDANCE
FOR THE PERIOD FROM 08.01.2004 29.12.2004
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM NO.
E1(a)/3334/2023/TVM (N) DATED 04.10.2023
Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2023 IN
Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.10.2023
Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO. A & V A2
/007202/23 DATED 25.10.2023 ISSUED BY THE
THIRD RESPONDENT
