Kannan vs Thrissur Municipal Corporation ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 30693 Ker

Kerala High Court

Kannan vs Thrissur Municipal Corporation ... on 30 October, 2024

Author: Murali Purushothaman

Bench: Murali Purushothaman

                                                           2024:KER:80763

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024/8TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                       WP(C) NO. 38175 OF 2024

PETITIONER:

               KANNAN
               AGED 60 YEARS
               S/O. KRISHNAN.C.N,
               CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, PERINCHERY.P.O.,
               THRISSUR, PIN - 680 306.

               BY ADVS.
               LINDONS C.DAVIS
               E.U.DHANYA
               N.S.SHAMILA
               CHINJU P. JOYIES


RESPONDENTS:

    1          THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION COUNCIL,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION
               OFFICE, M.O.ROAD, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.
    2          MAYOR,
               THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
               CORPORATION OFFICE, M.O.ROAD,
               THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.
    3          SECRETARY, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
               CORPORATION OFFICE, M.O.ROAD,
               THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.
    4          HEALTH OFFICER, THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
               CORPORATION OFFICE, M.O.ROAD,
               THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.

               SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL - SC


        THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   30.10.2024,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                      2024:KER:80763

WP(C) NO.38175 OF 2024
                              2




                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that he belongs to

Ulladan Tribe (Scheduled Tribe) in Thrissur

District. The Corporation of Thrissur called for a

list of candidates from the Employment Exchange

for appointment of contingent employees in the

Corporation. Pursuant to the list furnished by the

Employment Exchange, the petitioner was called

for an interview by the Corporation as per Ext.P1

notice and he attended the interview conducted

on 18.05.2020.

2. The selection to the post of contingent

employees was challenged before this Court.

This Court, by Ext.P3 order in W.A No.435 of 2022

and connected case permitted the Corporation to 2024:KER:80763

WP(C) NO.38175 OF 2024

proceed with the selection.

3. Thereafter, appointment orders were

issued in May, 2023. The petitioner did not

receive any order for appointment. On a querry

made by the petitioner, it was learnt that one

Sunitha T.K belonging to Scheduled Tribe who was

included in the selection list, did not join duty.

The petitioner legitimately expected that he

being the next Scheduled Tribe candidate

included in the rank list would be issued with

appointment order. The petitioner states that

though 100 vacancies of contingent employees

have been filled up, it is understood that there

are no Scheduled Tribe candidates appointed

against any of these vacancies. The petitioner

further states that as per Rule 14 of the Kerala 2024:KER:80763

WP(C) NO.38175 OF 2024

State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958,

there shall be reservation for Scheduled Tribe

candidates and the Corporation is bound to follow

the principle of reservation in the matter of

appointment. Ventilating grievance, the petitioner

has submitted Ext.P7 representation before the

Corporation Council, the appointing authority,

under Section 224 (1) of the Kerala Municipality

Act, 1994. The limited prayer of the petitioner at

this stage is for a consideration of Ext.P7 by the

1st respondent.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for

Thrissur Corporation.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the

case and having regard to the submissions made 2024:KER:80763

WP(C) NO.38175 OF 2024

across the Bar, there will be a direction to the 1 st

respondent to consider Ext.P7, in accordance with

law and after hearing the petitioner, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a

period of one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of with the

above direction.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

SPR 2024:KER:80763

WP(C) NO.38175 OF 2024

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.PH2/1018/06 DATED 04.05.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.04.2023 IN W.A.NO.435/2022.

EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.05.2023 IN W.A.NO.435/2022.

EXHIBIT P4 A COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 03.11.2023 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 A COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PH2/1018/06 DATED 19.02.2024.

EXHIBIT P6 A COPY OF THE LIST APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL AS PER DECISION NO.24 DATED 30.10.2020.

EXHIBIT P7 A COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03.10.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE THRISSUR CORPORATION COUNCIL THOUGH ITS SECRETARY.

      RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:     NIL.