ANITHA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is stated to be the daughter- in-law of Smt. Bhavani, whose property had been acquired by the Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd (hereinafter referred to as KMML for short), for the purpose of one of their projects and she says that in lieu of the said property being so acquired, an offer had been made by the Company, in consultation with the Government, that either the owners of the property or their dependents would be given employment in preference to others in KMML.

(2.) The petitioner's grievance is against Ext.P6 order, wherein she has been found unfit by the Company to be so appointed merely saying that she is a woman and incapable of being assigned duties in a mine and she contends that this is violative of her rights, both as the dependent of Smt. Bhavani and as a woman based on the inviolable imperatives of gender equality. She, thereafter, points out to Ext.P7 order of KMML, wherein several women have already been employed as Assistants to Contractors and she says that the action of KMML in issuing Ext.P6, denying her even such an opportunity is illegal, unlawful and discriminatory; thus being in violation of the principles of equality enshrined in the Constitution of India.

(3.) When this matter was taken up on 28.01.2019, the learned Standing Counsel for the KMML sought time to obtain instructions from the Company as to whether the petitioner can be considered for employment in the future vacancies by giving her preference, subject to her suitability.