SAJITHA S.N. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioners who were engaged on daily wage basis by the 2nd respondent institution which is an autonomous body functioning under the administrative control of the State Government. The petitioners state that they were employed as data entry operators on daily wages for more than 15 years and they were not regularised in service despite their long tenure of service in the said institution. While the prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to take steps to regularise the services of the petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioners have since been disengaged by the 2nd respondent institution, the petitioners would now restrict their prayer in the writ petition to a direction to the 1st respondent to consider their representation dated 03.02.2014 which is stated to be pending consideration before the 1st respondent. The petitioners would, in particular, place reliance on the Order No.B2/3192/2011 dated 26.09.2012 of the 3rd respondent which offers provisional appointment to Sri.Nazeer.A as Lab Assistant. It is the case of the petitioners that the said Sri.Nazeer was also working on contract basis under the 2nd respondent institution and there is no reason why a similar accommodation cannot be made in favour of the petitioners by the said institution.

(2.) I have heard Sri.B.Unnikrishna Kaimal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners, Sri.K.P.Sujesh Kumar, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 2 and