Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner is said to be an Empanelled Driver of the respondent Corporation having more than ten years of service as on 22.12.2011. Claiming regularisation, the petitioner submitted Exhibit P4 representation to the authorities. Complaining of its non disposal, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
3. As could be seen from the record, the Government issued Exhibit P3 Order extending the benefit of regularisation WPC 28012/14 2 to the Empanelled Drivers and Conductors subject to certain conditions. It is the case of the petitioner that he fulfills all the eligibility criteria and that the respondent authorities ought to have considered his Exhibit P4 representation positively.
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider petitioner's Exhibit P4 representation in the light of Exhibit P3 Government Order and also other statutory regulations, as well as the ratio laid down in Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala (2013 (2) KLT 258) and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No order as to costs.
Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv