Jyothish Govindankutty v. Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Managing Director, Kerala Feeds Limited, Kallattumkkara, Irinjalakkuda, Thrissur District

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 2[ND] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1944 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` JYOTHISH GOVINDANKUTTY AGED 44 YEARS S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY, RESIDING AT JYOTHI BHAVAN, MYTHREE NAGAR, NO. 7, MANIMALA FIRST CROSS ROAD, EDAPPALLY P.O, KOCHI 682 024 ``` ``` BY ADV A.K.ALEX ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001`** - **`2 MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA FEEDS LIMITED, KALLATTUMKARA, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 683 BY ADV JOSEPH M.P. M.RAJEEV, GP`** ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ## **Dated this the 2[nd] day of August, 2022** This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: _“(i) to issue a writ of certiorari, call for the records relating to Ext.P11 and quash it._ _(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction regularizing the service rendered by petitioner in Kerala Feeds and reinstate him in service._ _(iii) to direct the respondents to pay salary for the work done by petitioner with all consequential service benefits in Kerala Feeds in par with regular employees working there._ 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was selected pursuant to Ext.P1 call letter and appointed as Junior Assistant on temporary basis. It is submitted that though the appointment was only for 179 days, the petitioner was asked to continue in service and he continued without any break till 20.05.2018. He had worked for 12 years in the respondent-company and Exts.P2 and P3 requests were submitted by the petitioner for regularization in service, but the same were not considered. The petitioner had preferred Ext.P6 representation before the 1[st] respondent and had approached this ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 3 ``` Court. By Ext.P10 judgment dated 11.11.2019, this Court had directed the consideration of the representation preferred by the petitioner. Ext.P11 is the order passed by the 2[nd] respondent, which is under challenge in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decisions of the Apex Court in **Daily Rated Casual Labour employed under P and T Department through Bhartiya Dak Tak Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India and others** [1988 (1) SCC 122] and **State of Karnataka & others v. M.K.Kesari & others** [2010 (9) SCC 247] as well as of this Court in **Leela Amma v. Managing Director, KSHD Corpn. Ltd and others** [2014 (4) KHC 831] cover the issue and that even temporary employees from whom work is extracted are entitled to the benefits that are given to regular employees. 4. A detailed counter affidavit has been placed on record by the 2[nd] respondent. It is contended that the petitioner had been engaged on a purely temporary basis and on daily wages pursuant to Ext.R2(a), which is the appointment order dated 14.12.2005. It is submitted that the appointment order specified that the petitioner’s appointment would ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 4 ``` be on a temporary basis and on daily wages and that the petitioner would have no entitlement for any other benefits except the consolidated wages per day as stated specifically in the order. It is further submitted that though the petitioner had no claim to continue in service after the period as provided in Ext.R2(a) and though a discharge certificate was issued on 20.06.2006 to the petitioner, the petitioner had thereafter been engaged on various occasions on daily wage basis alone. It is submitted that there was no offer of regular appointment held out to the petitioner and the petitioner was fully aware that the appointments were on casual and daily wage basis and he was never appointed on any scale of pay by the 2[nd] respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner was given payment and benefits as applicable to other daily wage employees engaged by the company. It is further submitted that the petitioner had been engaged on occasional and casual basis in various departments during the period from June, 2006 to May, 2018. But from 10.05.2018, he discontinued his engagement and has not been present for duty since then. It is further submitted that the petitioner had informed that he had joined the Devaswom Board as a permanent ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 5 ``` employee with effect from 18.05.2018 and had also requested payment of benefits as applicable to permanent employees of the 2[nd] respondent. It is further submitted that on the basis of Ext.P10 judgment, the petitioner was put on notice and heard and Ext.P11 order had been issued. It is submitted that the Special Rules are framed for recruitment of Junior Assistants through PSC and are pending consideration before the Government for approval. The learned counsel for the respondents relies on the decisions of the Apex Court in **State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi** [2006 (4) SCC 1] and in **State of Jammu & Kashmir and others v. District Bar Association, Bandipora** [2017 (3) SCC 410] and **State of Karnataka & others v. G.V. Chandrashekhar** [2009 (4) SCC 342] and contends that a daily wage employee is not entitled to the benefits that are available to regular employees. 5. I have considered the contentions advanced. The petitioner was appointed by Ext.R2(a) on 14.12.2005 and that Ext.R2(a) specifically states that the appointment of the petitioner is on daily wages as Junior Assistant and that the period of engagement would be 179 days. By Ext.R2(b), the petitioner appears to have been discharged on ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 6 ``` completion of 179 days as well. Thereafter, though it is admitted by the respondents that the petitioner had been engaged in different departments under the 2[nd] respondent for clerical duties, there does not appear to have been any regular appointment granted to the petitioner. It is evident from the pleadings and the materials placed on record that the petitioner had procured a regular employment in the Devaswom Board and had voluntarily left the services of the 2[nd] respondent in 2018. 6. This Court in Ext.P10 judgment had directed the consideration of the petitioner’s claim for salary on par with permanent employees or commensurate with his qualification and other benefits as are applicable to regular employees. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decisions of the Apex Court and this Court, I am of the opinion that the facts are entirely different. The petitioner was engaged as Junior Assistant specifically on daily wage basis and on being informed that such appointment would not confer any right on him to seek permanency or regularization in service. The details of the later engagements of the petitioner are also not available before this ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 7 ``` Court. 7. In any view of the matter, the contentions raised by the petitioner have been considered and Ext.P11 order has been passed stating that since the petitioner’s appointments were on a casual and daily wage basis, he would not be entitled to any other benefits as has been claimed by him. In view of the fact that the petitioner had been engaged specifically on daily wage basis and without any order of regular engagement being granted to him, I am of the opinion that the contentions raised cannot be accepted and the petitioner’s claim that he is entitled to all benefits at par with permanent employees of the 2[nd] respondent cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the petitioner, admittedly, was never a permanent employee of the 2[nd] respondent. Therefore, the prayers as sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted. This writ petition thus fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. ## **`Sd/-`** ## **`ANU SIVARAMAN`** ## **`JUDGE`** ``` NP ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 4119 OF 2020 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4119/2020`** |**`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS`**|| |---|---| |**`EXHIBIT P1`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED ON 28-11-2005`**| ||**`TO PETITIONER APPOINTING HIM AS JUNIOR`**| ||**`ASSISTANT IN THE KERALA FEEDS LTD`**| |**`EXHIBIT P2`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 1-08-2011 SENT`**| ||**`BY PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR`**| ||**`AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, GOVT OF`**| ||**`KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM`**| |**`EXHIBIT P3`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16-06-`**| ||**`2015 SENT BY PETITIONER TO THE CHAIRMAN,`**| ||**`KERALA FEEDS LIMITED, KALLATTINKARA, THRISSUR`**| ||**`DISTRICT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P4`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23-09-`**| ||**`2019 SENT TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR ANIMAL`**| ||**`HUSBANDRY,. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM`**| ||**`BY THE PETITIONER.`**| |**`EXHIBIT P5`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WHICH`**| ||**`WHOS THAT EXT P4 IS RECEIVED BY THE HON'BLE`**| ||**`MINISTER FOR FOREST AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY`**| |**`EXHIBIT P6`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23-09-`**| ||**`2019 SENT BY PETITIOENR TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P7`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WHICH`**| ||**`EVIDENCES THAT EXT P6 IS RECEIVED BY THE 1ST`**| ||**`RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P8`**|**`TRUE COPY OF EXT P5 DATED 23-09-2019 SENT TO`**| ||**`THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY PETITIONER.`**| |**`EXHIBIT P9`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOPWLEDGEMENT`**| ||**`WHICH EVIDENCES THAT EXT P8 IS RECEIVED BY`**| ||**`THE 2ND RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P10`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS`**| ||**`HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C) 29634/2019`**| |**`EXHIBIT P11`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND`**| ||**`RESPONDENT ON 20-12-2019.`**| |**`RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS`**|| |**`EXHIBIT R2 A`**|**`TRUE COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED`**| ||**`14/12/2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT R2 B`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE DATED`**| ||**`20/6/2006 ISSUED TO HIM BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT R2 C`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23/9/2019`**| ||**`ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HON'BLE`**| ||**`MINISTER FOR ANIMAL HUSBANDARY`**| |**`EXHIBIT R2 D`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY 24/10/19 SUBMITTED BY`**| ||**`THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO GOVERNMENT`**|