High Court of KeralaDivision Bench2021-03-17Writ Appeal dismissed.

State of Kerala and Ors. v. J. Syamala Laksham Veedu and Tholicode Grama Panchayat

Case / Petition Number:WA.No.292/2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Alexander Thomas
K. Babu
Judgment Date: 2021-03-17
Court Decision / Holding: Writ Appeal will stand dismissed.
Final Disposition: Writ Appeal dismissed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

State of Kerala represented by Principal Secretary to Government, Local Self Government Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram-695001
Director of Panchayats
Deputy Director of Panchayats Thiruvananthapuram 695 033

Respondents

J. Syamala Laksham Veedu
Tholicode Grama Panchayat

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. B. Vinod (Senior Government Pleader)

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri. B. Raghunathan
• Sri. M. Dinesh

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ appeal challenges the directions in WP(C) No.11258 of 2015 directing the regularisation of a part-time sweeper engaged by Tholicode Grama Panchayat, Thiruvananthapuram. The matter traces Mercy v. State of Kerala (2004) and the Division Bench decision in Mercy’s case, which laid down a framework for regularising casual sweepers based on their sweeping area and the creation of posts, with dates anchored to 18.6.2001 or the date of appointment. GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin (25.11.2005) introduced the scheme; Paragraph 8 provides details on measurement and reclassification. GO(P) No.61/2010/Fin (09.02.2010) subsequently extended regularisation to existing sweepers beyond casual appointments if they were appointed on or before 25.11.2005. The court notes that the issue has already been decided against the State and in favour of the writ petitioner as per a prior O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020 decided on 9.3.2021, and thus the appeal is to be dismissed, with six weeks’ time granted to comply with the single-judge directions in 31.5.2019 WP(C). The registry is directed to annex the 9.3.2021 decision for reference, ensuring consistency of the regulatory approach. The judgment emphasizes implementing the established policy rather than reopening eligibility questions and charts the path for compliance within the given time frame.

Provisions of Law Cited

G.O.(P) No.501/2005/Fin dated 25.11.2005G.O.(P) No.61/2010/Fin dated 09.02.2010

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellants contend that regularisation of sweepers follows the policy laid down in GO(P) 501/2005/Fin and its later modification GO(P) 61/2010/Fin, making regularisation depend on a sweeping area threshold and the creation of appropriate posts. They submit that regularisation applies to existing casual sweepers and those appointed before 25.11.2005, with dates tied to 18.6.2001 or the appointment date. They rely on Mercy v. State of Kerala (2004 (2) KLT 848) and its affirmation in State of Kerala & Ors. v. M.M.Mercy & Ors. (W.A.No.1863 of 2004) to justify directions issued by the Single Judge and to resist a reversal of those directives. They urge adherence to the policy and date-based eligibility without re-opening issues.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that the writ petitioner is entitled to regularisation under the Mercy framework and the GO orders, especially where the 100 sq.m. threshold is met and appointments pre-date the cut-off. They contend that the 2019 directions of the Single Judge were proper and should stand, and that the State’s appeal should be dismissed in light of the 9.3.2021 O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020 decision. They assert that compliance with GO-based regularisation provisions (GO 501/2005 and GO 61/2010) should be effected within the six-week window and in accordance with the Mercy doctrine.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Mercy v. State of Kerala	2004 (2) KLT 848	Positive	Cited as the foundational authority establishing the regularisation policy for casual sweepers.
State of Kerala & Ors. v. M.M.Mercy & Ors.	W.A.No.1863 of 2004	Positive	Confirmed Mercy directions, reinforcing the regularisation framework.
O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020	O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020	Positive	Judgment dated 9.3.2021 decided in favour of the writ petitioner, relied upon by the present court.
W.P.(C) No.11258 of 2015	W.P.(C) No.11258 of 2015	Mentioned Only	Impugned judgment in WP(C) 11258/2015 forming the basis for the appeal; cited for context.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against State of Kerala and Ors. v. J. Syamala Laksham Veedu and Tholicode Grama Panchayat and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU** **WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942** **WA.No.292 OF 2021** **ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.11258/2015 DATED 31.5.2019** ## **APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN WP(C):** > **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** - **DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS** - **2 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033** - **3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033.** **SRI.B.VINOD, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 4TH RESPONDENT IN WP(C):** **1 J.SYAMALA LAKSHAM VEEDU, MALAYADI, ARYANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695542,(PART-TIME SWEEPER, THOLICODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THOLICODE.P.O, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541).** **2 THOLICODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, THOLICODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT,THOLICODE.P.O, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541.** **R1 BY SRI. B.RAGHUNATHAN R2 BY SRI. SRI.M.DINESH** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.A.No.292/2021 2 ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS & K.BABU, JJ. -------------------------------------------** W.A.No.292 of 2021 _(Arising out of the judgment dated 31.5.2019 in W.P.(C) No.11258 of 2015_ **--------------------------------------------** _Dated this the 17[th] day of March, 2021_ ## **JUDGMENT** ## _**Alexander Thomas, J.**_ Heard Sri.B.Vinod, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the appellants, Sri.B.Raghunathan, learned counsel appearing for R1(Writ Petitioner) and Sri.M.Dinesh, learned Standing Counsel for Tholicode Grama Panchayat appearing for R2. 2. The issue relates to entitlement of the first respondent to be regularised in service as a Part Time Sweeper. Pursuant to the directions issued by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the judgment in **Mercy v. State of Kerala reported in [2004 (2) KLT 848]** , confirmed by a Division Bench in the judgment dated 12.08.2005 in **State of Kerala & Ors. v. M.M.Mercy & Ors. (W.A.No.1863 of 2004 and connected cases)** , the State Government had issued GO(P) No.501/2005/Fin dated 25.11.2005, introducing a scheme to govern the cases of regularisation of existing eligible casual sweepers and regarding appointments to future W.A.No.292/2021 3 vacancies. Paragraph 8 of the above Government order deals with regularisation of the existing casual sweepers. As per the Government order, the sweeping area has to be calculated in accordance with the guidelines given in the appendix, the measurement being carried out by the PWD officials after notice to the incumbent casual sweeper and in his presence. Wherever the sweeping area exceeds 100 sq.mtrs. and if there is no post of Part Time Sweeper sanctioned for the office in question, but there is a casual sweeper being engaged, steps are to be taken for creation of a post of part time contingent sweeper. The posts are to be created with effect from the date of appointment of the incumbent as casual sweeper or from 18.6.2001 (i.e., three years preceding the date of the judgment of the learned Single Judge in _Mercy v. State of Kerala [2004 (2) KLT 848])_ , whichever is later. 3. The Government thereafter issued G.O.(P) No. 61/2010/Fin. dated 09.02.2010 modifying the earlier order dated 25.11.2005. It was ordered that all existing sweepers other than casual sweepers, irrespective of the mode of appointment, shall also be entitled for regularisation based on the sweeping area, provided that their appointments were made on or before the issuance of the Government order dated 25.11.2005. W.A.No.292/2021 4 4. After hearing both sides, it appears that the issue raised in this case is already decided against the appellant State and in favour of the Writ Petitioner employee as per the judgment rendered by this Court on 9.3.2021 in O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020. Hence this appeal is only to be dismissed in view of the reasonings and conclusions already arrived at by this Court in the judgment dated 9.3.2021 in O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020. However, we grant six weeks’ time to the appellants to comply with the directions issued by the learned Singe Judge as per the impugned judgment dated 31.5.2019 in W.P.(C) No.11258 of 2015. For the sake of clarity and easy reference, it is ordered that the Registry shall place a copy of the judgment dated 9.3.2021 rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in O.P.(KAT) No.382 of 2020 as annexure to this judgment. With these observations and directions, the above Writ Appeal will stand dismissed. Sd/- ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** Sd/- ## **K. BABU, JUDGE** csl