SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12833

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
RAGESH.R – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7110 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.A.ARUNA, SMT.JISHA SHAJI
For the Respondents: SMT. LATHA ANAND - SC

The court directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for employment, highlighting the urgency of the decision.

Headnote:This Writ Petition seeks to declare the petitioner's entitlement to be absorbed as a Direct Contract Worker in the Titanium Sponge Plant. The Court, assessing the urgency, directs the 2nd respondent to consider the representation during the next Board Meeting. The petitioner's interest as an 'evictee' has been duly noted. The Writ Petition is resolved with directions for the consideration of Ext.P8 representation.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for employment consideration. (Para 1)
2. court acknowledges the urgency of the situation. (Para 2)
3. court directs consideration of representation in the board meeting. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"i. To declare that the petitioner is entitled to be absorbed/appointed as Direct Contract Worker (DCW) in the Titanium Sponge Plant (TSP) Unit of the 2nd respondent by treating him as an employee engaged through the 5th respondent considering his “evictee” status.

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to absorb/appoint the petitioner as Direct Contract Worker (DCW) in the Titanium Sponge Plant (TSP) Unit of the 2nd respondent by treating him as an employee engaged through the 5th respondent and by also considering his “evictee” status, while implementing Ext P7.

iii. To issue a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext P8 representation submitted by the petitioner placing the same before the Board of Directors of the 2nd respondent before taking final decision on Ext P7 and affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

iv. To grant such other reliefs and orders as this Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue.

v. Permit the petitioners to file the writ petition without producing the English translations of the documents in vernacular.

vi. Award costs of the proceedings to the petitioner. "

[SIC]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P8 by the 2nd respondent. The counsel submitted that the Board Meeting is scheduled to be held on tomorrow, and similar cases are considering by the Board tomorrow.

3. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I think there can be a direction to consider Ext.P8 representation of the petitioner also, along with other requests from other parties on tomorrow itself.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

i) The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P8 representation, and pass appropriate orders in it, in the next Board Meeting.

ii) Issue a copy of this judgment today itself.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top