Article 227 limits High Court interference to grave perversity; upheld regularization of long-serving sweeper despite nomenclature dispute.

JUDGMENT :

MURALEE KRISHNA S., J.

1. The respondents in O.A.No.2181 of 2022 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram (the ‘Tribunal’ for short) filed this original petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging Ext.P6 order dated 19.12.2023 passed by the Tribunal in that original application.

2. Going by the averments in the original application, the respondent had been working as a part-time Casual Sweeper at the Government Press, Meppadi, Wayanad District, since 01.11.2004 without any break till 15.12.2022. On 15.12.2022, the 3^rd petitioner served the respondent with Annexure A6 order dated 06.02.2022 terminating her from service. The respondent is entitled to regularisation of her service as Part Time Sweeper as per Annexure A2 order dated 25.11.2005. The Sweeping area of the Government Press, Meppadi Wayanad District, was above 1228.78 sqm, and that of the Form store is 132.64 sqm. There is one full-time sweeper other than the respondent in the office. They are sweeping the Press and the Form Store. Hence, the case for regularisation of the respondent as a regular Part-time Sweeper on the basis of Annexure A2 government order ought to have been taken up immediately after 25.11.2005, the date of Annexure A2 order. The petitioners have failed in their duty. The termination of the service of the respondent as per Annexure A6 order by the 3^rd petitioner on the basis of Annexure A7 order dated 22.11.2022 of the 2^nd petitioner is illegal, without any authority of law, and is against Annexures A2 order dated 25.11.2005 and A4 order dated 09.02.2010 and Annexure A8 circular dated 19.11.2010 issued by the Government. With these pleadings, the respondent-applicant approached the Tribunal with the original application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) To issue a declaration that Annexure A6 and A7 issued by the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents respectively, are illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and is against Annexure A2 and A4 government orders, and against Annexure A8 Government Circular.

(ii) To issue a further declaration that the applicant is entitled to regularisation as Regular Part-time Sweeper in the higher scale in terms with Annexure A2 and Annexure A4 government orders with effect from 01.11.2004, i.e. from the original date of appointment of the applicant as Part-time Casual Sweeper at Government Press Meppadi, Wayanad District, consequential benefits.

(iii) To call for the records leading to Annexure A6 and A7 and set aside Annexure A5, A6 and A7.

(iv) To issue a direction, directing the 3^rd respondent to forward the proposal and the first respondent to regularize the service of the applicant as Regular Part-time Sweeper in terms with Annexure A2 and A4 government orders from 01.11.2004, i.e. from the original date of appointment of the applicant as Part-time Casual Sweeper at Government Press, Meppadi, Wayanad District, with all consequential benefits.”

3. The 2^nd petitioner filed a statement dated 02.02.2023 in the original application opposing the reliefs sought for and producing therewith Annexure R2(a) document. Thereafter, the 2^nd petitioner filed another reply statement dated 23.05.2023, producing therewith Annexures R2(b) and R2 (c) documents. To the reply statements filed by the 2^nd petitioner, the respondent filed a rejoinder dated 18.09.2023, producing therewith Annexures A10 to A12 documents. Again, the 2^nd petitioner filed an additional reply statement dated 16.11.2023 in the original application. After considering the rival contentions raised by the parties, the Tribunal, by Ext.P6 order dated 19.12.2023, allowed the original application.

4. Being aggrieved, the State and its offici