P. GOPALAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the petitioners joined the service of Kerala State Road Transport Corporation ('KSRTC' for brevity) as empanelled conductors on 18.03.1999 and 01.06.2000 respectively. In spite of Exhibit P5 Government Order, their services have not been regularised by the respondent Corporation on the premise that they did not complete 120 duties annually during the said period, notwithstanding completion of ten years of service. Thus, aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent Corporation in regularising their services, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation, on verification of Exhibits P2 and P4, has submitted that the first petitioner did complete ten years by 22.12.2011. At any rate, the learned Standing Counsel has further contended that though 120 duties a year in respect of temporary employees has become part of Exhibit P5 order through a subsequent amendment, it, however, relates back to the original date of Exhibit P5, and as such, the benefit of regularisation cannot be extended without the petitioners' establishing that they had 120 duties annually in those ten years.