High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
C.P.BABY v. UNION OF INDIA - OP No. 11208 of 2000(S)  RD-KL 9846 (8 June 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMOP No. 11208 of 2000(S)
1. UNION OF INDIA
For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SCGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
O R D E R
K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ.
O.P. NO.11208 OF 2000
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2007
J U D G M E N T
Radhakrishnan, J.Challenge is against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No.622 of 1998. The OA was preferred by the petitioners herein for a direction to the respondents to draw up and publish the gradation list of casual labourers as on 31/12/1997 taking into consideration the total number of days work put in each of them as on 31/12/1997 and to engage them as casual labourers forthwith in accordance with the newly drawn up gradation list. It was further prayed to set aside Annexure A9 dt.15.4.1998 and direct the respondents to draw up in each year the gradationlist of casual labourers as on 31st day of December of that year reviewing the previous year's Gradation List and to consider the applicants to the temporary status in view of their working more than 206 days in the calendar year 1996 as casual labourers.
2. Respondents contended before the Tribunal that the prayer of the petitioners to grant temporary status reckoning 206 OP 11208/2000 : 2 : days of work from the calendar year stands accepted and the same was counted from the date of engagement. Further it was also stated that the benefit available to the petitioners counting 206 days from the date of engagement have been given. Admittedly two of the applicants have been granted the benefit by applying the same yardstick. It was also pointed out that those who have completed 206 days of engagement will be granted temporary status. We find no infirmity in the order following the date of engagement as the criteria for granting temporary status. This criteria has been uniformly followed by the Department in case of all the employees. Counsel appearing for the petitioners further submitted that the Department is not updating the gradation list since there is no positive direction from the Tribunal. It is the duty of the Department to update the gradation list periodically and they may do so, so that the applicant will be able to know the place in the gradation list. With the above direction, this OP is disposed of.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.Rp
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.