Regularisation of employees is not a matter of right and must comply with statutory criteria.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10^th day of December, 2025 The petitioners, who have been working as waiter, cook, receptionist, etc. under the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited, have approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P10 and to command the respondents to grant the benefit of regularisation to the petitioners with effect from 2015.

2. The petitioners state that they responded to Ext.P1 notification dated 13.09.2006 and were called for interview for selection in the month of August, 2007. A list of candidates to be called for interview was published as per Ext.P3.

3. The petitioners state that appointments were given on the basis of seniority in Ext.P3 list at different period of time. The Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited then passed a resolution dated 07.12.2010 for regularising the employees who have completed three years of active service. When the petitioners completed three years of service, they made representation. However, their representations for regularisation were not promptly considered.

4. According to the petitioners, the employees who were continuing in service for long period on contract basis approached this Court filing three writ petitions and this Court passed Ext.P4 judgment on 04.03.2015. By Ext.P4 judgment, the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited was directed to take immediate steps to regularise all 38 employees ordered to be regularised as per Ext.P12 list produced in W.P.(C) No.23186 of 2014. As regards other employees, the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited was directed to take a decision in the matter of regularisation after verifying whether the petitioners have responded to the notification published in one of the dailies in Kerala. This Court directed that if the petitioners have been appointed pursuant to the notification published in the newspaper and after undergoing selection process, they should also be absorbed along with others. This Court also directed that after being regularised, the petitioners shall be given due seniority.

5. The petitioners submit that pursuant to Ext.P12, 38 employees were regularised. The petitioners case for regularisation was not considered. Thereupon, the petitioners preferred W.P.(C) No.39127 of 2018. This Court directed the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation in accordance with law. Pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment, the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited issued Ext.P7 proceedings dated 22.02.2021 regularising the petitioners working in various units on contract basis. By Ext.P7, the petitioners were placed in Scale of Pay.

6. The petitioners were regularised only with effect from 22.02.2021. The petitioners would argue that the criteria for regularising them are not that they had completed three years of active service as on 07.12.2010. Their selection was based on the notification published in the newspaper and after undergoing a selection procedure. The petitioners are therefore entitled to equal treatment and they should be regularised with effect from the date on which the 38 candidates were ordered to be regularised as per Ext.P4 judgment. 7. The petitioners would further urge that the Government Order for regularising employees in the post is one and the same for all working under the Department. Weighing similar employees in the same Department with different yardstick amounts to denial of justice to the petitioners. The petitioners have all the rights to be considered as equal to the other employees, who have been appointed during the same selection process. Ext.P10 order cannot be legally sustained, contend the petitioners.

8. Respondents filed counter affidavit. The respondents stated that t