SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST & WILDLIFE (F) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT AND OTHERS Vs. AJITHA N.S. PART TI, E CASUAL SWEEPER, FOREST RANGE OFFICE (TENDER DEPOT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Benefit granted by the Tribunal to reckon the sweeping area as 100 m2 in view of the measurements brought on record and to extend the benefit of regularization as a regular sweeper vide Annexure A3 order is subjected to challenge at the instance of the respondents in the T.A No.6947/2012.

(2.) Heard Sri.P.N.Santhosh, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri. C.K.Sreejith, who appeared on behalf of the respondent. The undisputed fact is that the respondent was being engaged as a part-time casual employee in the timber depot at Kannoth in Kannur District of the Forest Department, ever since from 2003 and that she was discharging her duties accordingly for the past 15 years. While so, by virtue of a beneficial order issued by the Government to cause regularization of the service of such sweepers vide Ext.P4 G.O dated 25.11.2005, read with Ext.P8 appendix, regularization of service was sought for by filing a representation. The 1st respondent approached this Court as well, by filing W.P.C.No.10836 of 2008, which came to be disposed as per Ext.P2 judgment, whereby a direction was given to have the issue considered as mentioned therein. The 1st respondent produced Ext.P3 certificate dated 25.11.2006 from the Assistant Engineer, PWD (buildings) to the effect that the total sweeping area was more than 100 m2 (101.24 m2). Based on the direction given by this Court, the finance wing of the Department conducted an inspection and according to them, the total area was only 95.59m2. It was accordingly, that the claim was rejected as per Ext.P5; which was under challenge in W.P.(C).No.17976 of 2008. After hearing both the sides, this Court directed a fresh measurement be effected by an officer superior to the post of Assistant Engineer as per Ext.P6 dated 18.08.2008.

(3.) Based on the above verdict, the measurement was effected and according to the Department, it was only 95.09m2 after excluding the stairs and landing area/platform, also adding that the total area would be 99.6 m2, if the excluded area was also included. This made the 1st respondent to approach this Court again by filing W.P. (C).No.2797 of 2011, which later came to be transferred to the Tribunal, where it was renumbered as T.A.No.6947 of 2012. The Tribunal made a meticulous analysis of the facts and figures and it was held that there was absolutely no justification to have left out the stair area and the platform/landing area, more so since no such stipulation is there in the relevant Government Order, which in fact was a beneficial order intending to extend benefits to the persons who have been rendering service as part time sweepers. It is also relevant to note that the Department had cancelled before the Tribunal that there was no dispute to the fact that stairs as well as the landing area were also being swept by the respondent employee. In the said circumstances, the Tribunal directed the Department to round the certified area of 99.60 m2 as 100m2, in turn giving appropriate direction to the Department to have the service regularized accordingly.