High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeThe impugned orders are quashed, and the writ p...

W.P.(C) Nos. 10340, 13407 & 26321 of 2018

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) Nos. 10340, 13407 & 26321 of 2018

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • The Hon'ble Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.
Judgment Date
2025-04-03
Court Decision / Holding
The impugned orders are quashed, and the writ petitions are allowed as above. There will be a direction to the Food Corporation of India to consider the petitioners in terms of the earlier directions rendered by Ext.P13 judgment, and fresh orders must be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment after hearing the parties.
Final Disposition
The impugned orders are quashed, and the writ petitions are allowed. Fresh orders shall be issued within three months after hearing, in terms of Ext.P13 directions and subject to the Court’s directions to consider the petitioners’ cases under the earlier framework and policy, with due regard to the long service and the essence of the employment.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • WP(C) 10340/2018 petitioners: A. Sunil Kumar; Geevarghesekutty G; S. Mohammed Ishack; V.K. Sajeevan; P.M. Ibrahimkutty
  • WP(C) 13407/2018 petitioners: R. Sudarsanan; R. Sivadas; M. Sukumaran; Krishnadas M Arun Nivas; M. Suresh; Lakshmi Devi; P.M. Chandran; K.P. Gopakumar; Leela Sadanam; K. Radha Sudheesh; Santhakumari M Moochikkal; Thahira N; Santheera?; Santhe Madhuri?; Salam TC/35/913; M. Abdul Kalam; A.K. Sulfik ar; K. Unnikrishnan; M. Unnikrishnan; M. B. Sulaiman; M. Shahul Hameed; M. Radhakrishnan; N. Ravi; M. Vijayan; A.M. Pradeep Kumar; M. Ravichandran; K.P. Vijayakumaran; A. Babu Koratthodi; B. Vinod Karathodi; K. Mani Pranavam; G. Kishore Kumar; S.A. Abubacker
  • WP(C) 26321/2018 petitioners: Martin.P.P.; Ruby K.T.; M.C. Binu Maliackal; K.V. Cherian Karedathu; Benny V.M.; K.A. Shameer; Dixon N.A.; Poly John Chirakkal; Varghese C.V.; Biju Paul Chackethu; S. Shameer; Sidhik Shajeela; Salam TC/35/913; M. Abdul Kalam; A.K. Sulfik ar; K. Unnikrishnan; M. Unnikrishnan; M. B. Sulaiman; M. Shahul Hameed; M. Radhakrishnan; N. Ravi; M. Vijayan; A.M. Pradeep Kumar; M. Ravichandran; K.P. Vijayakumaran; A. B. Abu; B. Vinod; K. Mani Pranavam; G. Kishore Kumar; S. A. Abubacker

Respondents

  • FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA represented by the Chairman & Managing Director, FCI, New Delhi
  • GENERAL MANAGER KERALA FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, Kesavadasapuram, Thiruvananthapuram
  • ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, Kesavadasapuram
  • UNION OF INDIA represented by the Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution
  • ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER CENTRAL, Kendriya Shram Sadan, Kochi

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • P. Sankaran Kutty Nair
  • • Shankar V.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • TPM Ibrahim Khan (Sr.)
  • • K.M Abdul Majeed (FCI)
  • • Jaishankar V. Nair (CGC)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The three linked writ petitions, all filed in the Kerala High Court, challenge the status and regularisation of casual/daily-rated workers employed by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) under the Direct Payment System (DPS). The petitioners argue they were casually engaged for office work and, having served for long periods (often over 20 years), are entitled to temporary status and eventual regularisation. They rely on Ext.P3 (and related records) and on prior directions in this Court’s common judgment in W.P.(C) No. 27816 of 2017 and connected cases, contending that outcomes should not be foreclosed by nomenclature (casual vs ancillary) and that those similarly situated should not be discriminated against. They also point to the earlier DPS framework and seek redress under the Court’s earlier indications in Ext.P13 and subsequent directions. The respondents maintain that the petitioners are ancillary workers, not casual labourers, and that extant policy (Ext.P14, 21.03.2018) precludes temporary status or regularisation for such employees. The Court recalls the 2017 judgment, notes the long service and inadequate benefits under DPS, and cites Jaggo v. Union of India for the principle that the essence of employment must be examined. It quashes the impugned orders, directs reconsideration under the earlier directions (Ext.P13) and remands with a requirement to pass fresh orders within three months after hearing the petitioners. The petitions are allowed to the extent indicated.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that they are casual workers or daily-rated employees engaged by FCI and have served for long spells, with some already retired—thus deserving temporary status and eventual regularisation under the Court’s earlier directions. They rely on Ext.P3 and the common judgment in W.P.(C) No. 27816 of 2017 to show that those engaged as casual workers prior to 2012 and continuing for long periods should be considered for regularisation, as they face discrimination relative to those recognised as casual workers under the DPS. They urge the Court to apply the decision in Ext.P13 and to ensure that any policy changes do not deprive similarly situated workers of benefits. They challenge Ext.P14 (2018) as arbitrary and unsubstantiated, arguing that the classification of petitioners as ancillary workers contradicts the documents issued by FCI and denies due process. They request quashment of the impugned orders and a direction to consider their cases afresh within a short timeline after hearing.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents maintain that petitioners are ancillary workers, not casual labourers, and were brought under the Direct Payment System with limited benefits. They rely on Ext.P14 (21.03.2018) to argue that temporary status/regularisation is not available under current policy for such employees. They assert there are disputed facts and lack of material to grant relief; hence, a fresh examination under Ext.P13 directions is necessary, but subject to the policy constraints. They contend that long service alone does not automatically grant temporary status or regularisation and stress the need for a policy-based, rule-bound resolution.

Cited Precedents (6)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Jaggo v. Union of India2024 KHC 6750PositiveCited by the court to support the proposition that the essence of employment must be considered rather than mere labeling of initial appointments. The judgment informs the court’s approach to evaluating long service and the nature of work beyond rigid nomenclature.
W.P.(C) No. 27816 of 2017(2017)PositiveCited as the basis of the court’s prior stance that petitioners’ claims for temporary status and regularisation should be examined, especially given two decades of service under DPS and benefits already received by others.
W.P.(C) 36209/2017 and connected cases01.12.2017Mentioned OnlyExhibited judgment referenced to illustrate related precedents; not expressly applied by the Court in its reasoning for the present case.
Civil Appeal Nos. 8841-8843 of 2019Supreme Court of IndiaMentioned OnlyAnnexed as respondent exhibit; cited as part of documentary materials rather than as a direct controlling authority in the present disposition.
CMP(MD) Nos. 5730 and 7713 of 2017, Madras High Court Madurai Bench—Mentioned OnlyExhibited in the Appendix; referenced for background context rather than as a directly controlling authority in the present judgment.
Judgment in WP(C) 27816/2017 dated 15.12.2017—Mentioned OnlyAssociated with the petitioner’s lineage of arguments via Ext.P13; cited as persuasive background material.

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 W.P.(C) Nos. 10340, 13407 & 26321 of 2018 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ## **`1`** **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 10340 OF 2018`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** - **`1 A.SUNIL KUMAR, CASUAL WORKER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM-691001.`** - **`2 GEEVARGHESEKUTTY G CASUAL WORKERS, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA.690110.`** - **`3 S. MOHAMMED ISHACK CASUAL WORKER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, ANGAMALY-PIN.683572.`** - **`4 V.K SAJEEVAN CASUAL WORKER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, ANGAMALY, PIN. 683572.`** - **`5 P.M IBRAHIMKUTTY CASUAL WORKER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, ANGAMALY, PIN. 683572.`** ## **`BY ADVS. P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR SHANKAR V.`** ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, HEADQUARTERS, 16-20, BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI- 110001.`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 2 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ``` 2GENERAL MANAGER FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE,KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695004. ``` ``` BY ADVS. TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN (SR.) SRI.K.M.ABDUL MAJEED, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.13407/2018, 26321/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ``` 3 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 13407 OF 2018 ``` ## **`PETITIONERS:`** - **`1 R. SUDARSANAN, AGED 52 YEARS SUDHARSANAM, PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD-678731.`** - **`2 R. SIVADAS`** ``` MARATHUPARAMBU, PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD-678731. ``` - **`3 M.SUKUMARAN PARAKKAL HOUSE, TAZHE MURALIM, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`4 KRISHNADAS M ARUN NIVAS, TAZHE MURALI, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`5 M. SURESH PARAKKAL HOUSE, ANAND NAGARKLLEKULANGARA P.O, PALAKKAD 678009`** - **`6 LAKSHMI DEVI M KALPADAKKAL HOUSE KANNADI P.O, PALAKKAD.`** ## **`7 P.M.CHANDRAN`** - **`PANNIKODE HOUSE, KONGAD P.O, PALAKKAD 678731`** - **`8 K.P.GOPAKUMAR`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 4 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:28382` ## **`LEELA SADANAM, PUTHUPARIARAM P.O, PALAKKAD-678731.`** - **`9 K. RADHA SUDHEESH VIHAR, PRECOT MILL NEW COLONY CHEDEYANKALAI, KANJIKODE P.O., PALAKKAD.`** - **`10 SANTHAKUMARI M. MOOCHIKKAL HOUSE, ALLATH PARAMBU, PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`11 THAHIRA N 8/413(A), LAKSHAMVEEDU COLONY INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O,PALAKKAD.`** - **`12 SANTHA M.R MAHALI HOUSE, MUTTIKULANGARA P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.`** - **`13 G. JANARDHANAN MARATHPARAMBU HOUSE, NEAR ANGANVADI, PUTHIPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`14 A. FAROOK AL-AMEEN MANZIL, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O,PALAKKAD.`** - **`15 V. JANARDHANAN KRISHNA VIHAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O,PALAKKAD.`** - **`16 SHOUKATHALI K.H MONU MOLU MANZIL, LAL NAGAR PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`17 M. UNNIKRISHNAN NAMPULLYPURA HOUSE, NAMPULLYPURA P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`18 M. B.SULAIMAN NIHAL MANZIL, NEAR RAILWAY HOSPITAL KALLEKULANGARA P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`19 M. SHAHUL HAMEED`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 5 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:28382` ``` BISMILLA MANZIL, KALIMA NAGAR OTHUNGODE, THIRUNELAYI P.O., PALAKKAD. ``` ``` 20M. RADHAKRISHNAN PARAKKAL HOUSE, THAZHEMURALI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O,PALAKKAD. ``` - **`21 N. RAVI HOUSE NO.1V, 159, PARAKKAL HOUSE, TAZHEMURALI, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`22 M. VIJAYAN SHYLA BHAVAN, CHERUNGETTUKAVU, NSS ENGINEERING COLLEGE P.O., PALAKKAD.`** - **`23 A.M.PRADEEP KUMAR ATHIKKAL HOUSE, PUDANUR P.O, MUDUR,PALAKKAD`** - **`24 M. RAVICHANDRAN RAVI NIVAS, PANGAL PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`25 K.P.VIJAYAKUMARAN PRATHEEKSHA, PANGAL, PUTHUPARIYARAM, PALAKKAD.`** - **`26 A. BABU KORATTHODI HOUSE, MARATH PARAMBIL, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`27 B.VINOD KARATHODI HOUSE, PARIYASSERY MANKARA P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`28 K. MANI PRANAVAM, MADRASSA NAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O,PALAKKAD.`** - **`29 G. KISHORE KUMAR`** - **`H.NO.466, AYYAPPANKAVU, KARINGARAPULLY P.O,`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 6 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:28382` ## **`INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, PALAKKAD.`** - **`30 S. A. ABUBACKER SADDIK VALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHUPARIYARAM P.O, PALAKKAD.`** ``` BY ADVS. C.ANIL KUMAR A.K.PREETHA ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, 16-20 BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI 11000, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR.`** - **`2 GENERAL MANAGER KERALA FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695004`** - **`3 ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM PALACE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695004`** - **`4 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION. NEW DELHI-110001.`** ``` BY ADVS. TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN (SR.) SRI.K.M.ABDUL MAJEED, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.10340/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ``` 7 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 26321 OF 2018`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** - **`1 MARTIN.P.P., AGED 41 YEARS PARAYIL HOUSE, MAIKAD P.O., CHEMBANNOOR, ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.`** - **`2 RUBY K.T. KAITHARATH HOUSE, ANGAMALY, PIN - 683572, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.`** - **`3 M.C. BINU MALIACKAL, ANGAMALY P.O.`** - **`4 K.V. CHERIAN KAREDATHU, KIDANGOOR, ANGAMALY.`** - **`5 BENNY V.M. VADAKKUMCHERY HOUSE, ANGAMALY P.O.`** - **`6 K.A. SHAMEER KAVUNGAL HOUSE, KACHERIPADY, PALLUVURUTHY.`** - **`7 DIXON N.A. NANGERI HOUSE, PALLURUTHY.`** - **`8 POLY JOHN CHIRAKKAL HOUSE, AISWARYA NAGAR, THURAVOOR P.O.`** - **`9 VARGHESE C.V.`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 8 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:28382` ## **`CHERUMADATHIL, 297, NN NAGAR, ANGAMALY SOUTH.`** - **`10 BIJU PAUL CHACKETHU HOUSE, KIDANGOOR P.O., ANGAMALY.`** ## **`11 S. SHAMEER`** ``` TC/35/586, PRIYADARSINI NAGAR, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM. ``` - **`12 S. SIDHIK SHAJEELA MANZIL, PULLAIKONAM, BALARAMAPURAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM.`** - **`13 SALAM TC/35/913, PUTHEN ROAD JUNCTION, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM.`** - **`14 M. ABDUL KALAM TC/78/2263, SULAIMAN STREET, AIRPORT ROAD, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM.`** - **`15 A.K. SULFIKAR TC/35/605, PRIYADARSINI NAGAR, VALLAKKADAVU P.O., TRIVANDRUM.`** - **`16 K. UNNIKRISHNAN VALAPPIL ILLAM, NEAR MANAPPURATH KAVE, KIZHAKKAN KOZHUVEL, NILESHWAR, KASARGOD DISTRICT.`** ``` BY ADVS. K.BALACHANDRAN (MANGALATH) RAJESH NAIR S.S.SRINATH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD & PUBLIC`** ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 9 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ``` DISTRIBUTION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 110001. ``` - **`2 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, 16-20, BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI.`** - **`3 THE GENERAL MANAGER KERALA, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTAM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004.`** - **`4 THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER CENTRAL KENDRIYA SHRAM SADAN, OALIMUGAL, KAKKANAD, KOCHI - 682030.`** ``` BY ADVS. SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC SRI.TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN (SR.) SRI.K.M.ABDUL MAJEED, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.10340/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 10 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:28382` ## **MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J.** ## **========================** **W.P(C) Nos.10340, 13407 &** ## **26321 of 2018** ## **=========================** ## **Dated this the 3[rd] day of April, 2025** ## **J U D G M E N T** The petitioners in all these cases work in the Food Corporation of India under the direct payment system and are claiming temporary status and regularisation. While the petitioners claim that they are casual labourers/workers, the respondents asserts that they are only ancillary workers. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, relying on Ext.P3 produced in W.P.(C) No. 26321 of 2018, contends that they are entitled to be granted temporary status to casuals/daily rated workers engaged in various officers in Food Corporation of India. It is also pointed out that some of the petitioners retired pending the writ petition. Earlier, the petitioners approached this Court wherein this ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 11 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## Court, by its common judgment in W.P.(C) No. 27816 of 2017 and connected cases dated 01.12.2017 held as follows; “ The claim of all the petitioners is for temporary status and for regularisation. They apprehend even denial of consideration of their cases if the present process of recruitment is made and the vacancies are filled up. When petitioners submit that they are not paid on days when there is no work and temporary status is granted to similarly situated others, the contention of the respondents is that petitioners are already regularised with benefit of wage revision every six months and they are getting all benefits. According to respondents petitioners are not casual labourers but they are ancillary labourers and they are already brought under direct payment system. At any rate, it appears that those who are recognised as casual labourers by FCI, as stated in the counter affidavit, are on a better footing than the persons like petitioners who are described as Ancillary Labourers. Whatever be the nomenclature given to the petitioners, it is seen that petitioners, though brought under the DPS in the year 1996 are getting lesser benefits than that of those granted temporary status. It is more than twenty years since the petitioners are brought under the direct payment system. It cannot be said that there is any absolute bar in the Judgment of the Apex Court in considering the case of the petitioners, as the petitioners have been continuing for the last more than 20 years on the basis of orders passed by the respondents themselves in 1996. Even though the respondents have stated that they are already regularised and they are given several benefits, it is the case of the petitioners that they do not get any pay on days when there is no work and several of them do not have any work or pay for several days in every month and that on grant of temporary status they will be placed in the lowest scale of pay of last grade/class IV servants. It appears that the grievance of the petitioners requires to be examined and appropriate steps shall be taken for redressal of the same without subjecting them to any discrimination based on region or otherwise. In view of the disputed factual questions, this Court is unable to adjudicate the matter.” ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 12 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` 3. This Court found that the claim of the petitioners even then was for temporary status and regularisation. The FCI had contended that the petitioners are not to be treated as casual labourers only as ancillary labourers, who were brought under the direct payment system, granting certain benefits. This Court found that the petitioners have worked for more than 20 years and were brought under the direct payment system, and they cannot be treated differently from those who were granted temporary status. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 10340 of 2018 and W.P.(C) No. 26321 of 2018 would point out with reference to the exhibits produced that the respondents themselves have treated the petitioners as casual labourers and therefore, they cannot be allowed to make a difference just based on nomenclature given to the petitioners as the nature of the work remains the same. The nature of the work is described in Ext.P10 in W.P.(C) No. 26321 of 2018. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also submits that the respondents could not have differentiated between the employers ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 13 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` and if they come up with a policy decision, its benefits must be available to all the petitioners, who fall within the parameters of such policy and the authorities cannot be allowed to pick and choose between the similarly situated. 5. Consequent to the directions issued by this Court in the aforementioned judgment, Ext.P14 order was passed on 21.03.2018 holding that the petitioners cannot be granted regularisation/ temporary status which, according to them, is only applicable to casual workers continuing in service of the Corporation for more than a period 10 years as on 01.07.2012 and engaged for office work. The specific case of the petitioners is that they meet the criteria fixed by the respondents despite which Ext.P14 order was passed. The reasons given in Ext.P14 are not based on any material,in particular for treating the petitioners as ancillary workers, contrary to the documents issued by the FCI itself, and do not consider whether the petitioners meet the criteria put forth by the FCI for granting temporary status. The observations of the binding inter-party ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 14 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` judgment were also not considered. 6. The learned Counsel also relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in _**Jaggo v. Union of India (2024 KHC 6750),**_ for the preposition that the long and uninterrupted services for periods extending well beyond ten years, cannot be dismissed merely by labelling the initial appointments of contract employers as part time or contractual and that the essence of the employment must be considered, the initial nature of the employment, their sustained contribution and the integral nature of the work and on evidence suggesting that the entry was not through any illegal or surreptitious route. 7. Under such circumstances, the impugned orders in all these cases are quashed, and there will be a direction to the Food Corporation of India represented by its Chairman & Managing Director, 2[nd] respondent in W.P.(C) No. 26321 of 2018 or such other competent authority to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the earlier directions rendered by this Court in Ext.P13 judgment ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 15 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` referred to above and the observations in this judgment. The petitioners or the representatives will be heard, and fresh orders as directed above shall be passed within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The impugned orders are quashed, and the writ petitions are allowed as above. Sd/- **MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE** LU ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 16 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13407/2018`** ## **`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES :`** ``` ANNEXURE R1(A)TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2019 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8841-8843 OF 2019 OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ANNEXURE R1(B)TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.11.2017 IN CMP(MD) NOS. 5730 AND 7713 OF 2017, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS, MADURAI BENCH ``` ## **`PETITIONER EXHIBITS :`** ``` EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. IR(L)/8(22)/94 DATED 14/6/1996 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE WORK DESCRIPTION OF ANCILLARY LABOUR, NO.1R-L/(32(1)/2000 DATED 18/8/2000 EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE VACANCY POSITION IN THE PALAKKAD GODOWN UNDER THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. OMISS-03-2013- 03 DATED 16/5/2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IR-L/30(11) DATED 2/12/2014 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 1/12/2017 IN WPC NO. 24514/2017 EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. IR(S)/ANCILLARY LABOUR/KERALA/2018 DATED 23/3/2018 ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 17 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26321/2018`** ``` RESPONDENT ANNEXURES : ANNEXURE R2(A)TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2019 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8841-8843 OF 2019 OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT ANNEXURE R2(B)TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.11.2017 IN CMP(MD) NOS. 5730 AND 7713 OF 2017, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS, MADURAI BENCH PETITIONER EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1COPY OF LETTER DATED 03.02.2017 ADDRESSED TO SRI. SAMUEL JOSEPH UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. EXHIBIT P2COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. EXHIBIT P3EXTRACT OF THE 367TH BOARD MEETING (ITEM NOS. 74/2014 AND 75/2014) DATED 19.12.2014. EXHIBIT P4COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5COPY OF THE 'ABSENTEE STATEMENT' DATED 16.05.98 OF CASUAL LABOURERS ISSUED BY THE ASST. MNR (DEPOT) FCI, ANGAMALY. EXHIBIT P6COPY OF THE 'ABSENTEE STATEMENT' DATED 14.08.98 OF CASUAL LABOURERS ISSUED BY THE ASST. MNR (DEPOT) FCI, ANGAMALY. EXHIBIT P7COPY OF THE 'ABSENTEE STATEMENT' DATED 22.08.98 OF CASUAL LABOURERS ISSUED BY THE ASST. MNR (DEPOT) FCI, ANGAMALY. EXHIBIT P8COPY OF STATEMENT DATED 26.11.2016 WITH REGARD TO WORK DONE BY CASUAL LABOURERS AT FSD MSY KOCHI ISSUED BY THE MANAGER (DEPOT), FCI FSD W/ISLAND. ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 18 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` ## **`EXHIBIT P9`** ``` COPY OF NOTE DATED 02.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE MANGER OF THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P10COPY OF NOTICE DATED 25.06.2016 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER OF THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION WITH TRANSLATION. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P11COPY OF LETTER DATED 03.01.2017 OF THE FCIEA SUBMITTED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P12COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER NOTIFICATION ISSUED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 15.06.2017 WITH TRANSLATION. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P13COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 01.12.2017 IN W.P.(C) 36209/17 AND CONNECTED CASES. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P14COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.03.2018 OF THE 2ND RESPT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P15COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 04.04.2018 OF SRI. SAMUEL JOSEPH. EXHIBIT P16COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 16/17.05.2013. EXHIBIT P17COPY OF REPLY LETTER DATED 29/11/2018 RECEIVED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER UNDER THE RTI ACT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P18COPY OF REPLY LETTER DATED 07/12/2018 RECEIVED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER UNDER THE RTI ACT. EXHIBIT P19COPY OF IDENTITY CARD TO THE 3RD PETITIONER EXHIBIT P20COPY OF IDENTITY CARD TO THE 5TH PETITIONER ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 19 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10340/2018`** ## **`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES :`** ``` ANNEXURE R1(A)TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2019 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8841-8843 OF 2019 OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ``` ``` ANNEXURE R1(B)TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.11.2017 IN CMP(MD) NOS. 5730 AND 7713 OF 2017, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS, MADURAI BENCH ``` ## **`PETITIONER EXHIBITS :`** ``` EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.IR (L)/O(22)/94 ISSUED BY THE FCI DATED 14.6.1996 STIPULATING THE CONDITION OF THE CASUAL LABOURERS/ ANCILLARY LABOURERS. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.IR-L32(1)/2000 DATED 18.8.2000 OF THE FCI. EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.OMISS -03-2013- 03 DATED 16.5.2013. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.IR(P & ID/6(P & 9D)/6-2/2011N VOL.III/667 DATED 24.10.2016. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.IR IR (P & ID)/6- 2/2011 VOL.III/667 DATED 24.10.2016. EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 15.7.2017. EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.S & C 13(1) /96- GENL. CORRESP. DATED 29.1.1997 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT MANAGER OF THE FCI, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.S & W 32(MIS)/WH 2013 DATED 12.1.2011. EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.S & S /NWNP/WH/2014-15 DATED 9.12.2014. ``` ``` WP(C) NOs. 10340, 13407 & 26321 OF 2018 ``` ``` 20 ``` ``` 2025:KER:28382 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.S & S 32(1)/WH/MIS /12 DATED 29.10.2012. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ESST. 32(1)/2016 AMO/RTI DATED 19.10.2016 RECEIVED UNDER THE RTI ACT FROM THE REGIONAL OFFICE AT TRIVANDRUM. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P12TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.27816 OF 2017 DATED 15.12.2017. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P13TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS THROUGH THEIR REPRESENTATIVES DATED 6.3.2018. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P14TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.IR(S) ANCILLARY LABOUR/KERALA/2018 DATED 21.3.2018. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P15TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1746 OF 2013 DATED 20.3.2014. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P16TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A NO.2491/2009 DATED 15.2.2010 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS :`** ``` EXHIBIT R1(A)TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 02/05/2018 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.10449/11 & 10511/11 OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ``` ``` EXHIBIT R1(B)TRUE COPY OF ISSUES OF REFERENCE NO. NTB-1 OF 2003 OF NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL MUMBAI DT. 27-05-2004. ``` ``` EXHIBIT R2(A)TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT CALENDAR PAGE OF THE YEAR 2019 PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA ``` ## **`// True Copy // PA To Judge`**