G SHIBU Vs. KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(2.) Petitioners claim that they were working as contingent cleaning employees on daily wages from 29.05.2011 onwards in the Kayamkulam Municipality. It is stated that, they had expressed their willingness to do scavenging work also and they had been doing the said work apart from clearing garbage regularly without any break even on holidays. It is further stated that, at a time when their requests for regularisation were pending, they were denied employment on 25.02.2013 onwards. It is stated that, on the basis of their representations the Municipal council had passed Ext.P47 resolution dated 24.10.2014 in which it was decided to include the petitioners in the list of substitute workers and thereafter to appoint them as permanent workers and to seek permission for the same from the Government. The writ petition was filed thereafter stating that, even after the said resolution of 24.10.2014 no action was taken to re-induct them or regularise them.

(3.) The respondents 1 and 2 have filed counter affidavit admitting that petitioners had been working on daily wages from 29.01.2011 onwards and that they were directed not to come for work from the last week of February 2014. It is also admitted that the 1st respondent had as per Ext.P47 resolution no.2(b) dated 24.10.2014 decided to induct the petitioners in the contingent establishment. It is stated that by mistake it was decided to seek permission from Government, without noticing the provisions contained in Section 224 of Kerala Municipalities Act, according to which the Municipal Council is the authority to take such decision and clarification from Government, is actually not required. The 2nd respondent stated that the said decision to seek clarification was misconception of facts under the impression that clarification from Government was also necessary for appointment of contingent workers on regular basis.