M. LAILAT, LEPROSY INSPECTOR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioners are the appellants. While regularising their service as Leprosy inspectors in the Health service Department, Government ordered that such regularisation can only be prospective and that their past service would not be counted for any service benefits, including pension. Their challenge against such restrictions imposed as per Ext.Pi Government Order was turned down by the learned single Judge. Hence, this appeal.

(2.) SRI .Kaleeswaramraj, the learned counsel for the appellants, argued that the conditions imposed in the impugned Ext.Pi that regularisation will have only perspective effect and that past service would not be counted for any service benefits including pension, are arbitrary and unreasonable on the facts and circumstances of the case. He criticized such restrictions as amounting to indignation of the appellants, who are marginalised people; their pathetic situation being reflected even in the Government Orders which have ultimately been issued on 'humanitarian' consideration.

(3.) APART from the materials on record before the learned single Judge, three additional documents have been admitted in evidence in the writ appeal. They are two Government Orders and a judgment of this Court in w.A.No.513 of 2014. That apart, we had the opportunity to peruse the Training Manual for Medical officers issued by the National Leprosy Eradication Programme under the Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family welfare, Government of India which, among other things, discloses, to a great extent, the efforts taken by India towards leprosy eradication. We also called for the Judges Papers and judgment in WP(C)NO.12751 of 2004 decided by the Division Bench on 4th January, 2007 along with two writ appeals since was seen that they would be profitable for reference in view of the relevant issues and because this is a Court of Record.