Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners are said to be Empanelled Drivers of the respondent Corporation having more than 10 years of service as on 22.12.2011. Claiming regularisation, the petitioners submitted Exts.P18 to P21 representations to the authorities. Complaining of their non disposal, they approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
3. As could be seen from the record, the Government issued Ext.P9 Government Order extending the benefit of regularisation to the Empanelled Drivers and Conductors W.P.(C). No.32290/2014 -2-
subject to certain conditions. It is the case of the petitioners that they fulfill all the eligibility criteria and that the respondent authorities ought to have considered their Exts.P18 to P21 representations positively.
In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider petitioners' Exts.P18 to P21 representations in the light of Ext.P9 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 two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No order as to costs.
sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.
rv W.P.(C). No.32290/2014 -3-