1.The Chairman,Tneb v. 1.The Govt., Of Tn Rep.By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.11.2024

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and WPMP.No.39085 of 2003 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai.

2.The Chief Engineer/Personnel, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai.

3.The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Elecy. Distn. Circle, Metro/Trichy-20.

... Petitioners vs.

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Chennai-9 2.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Labour and Employment Department, Chennai-9.

3.The Labour Inspector, Karur.

1/8

4.K.Ganesan 5.P.Karuppaiah 6.V.Palaniyandi 7.M.Selvaraj 8.V.Mani 9.F.Mariya Jeganathan 10.S.Mookkan 11.S.Namachivayam 12.M.Kandan 13.K.Ponnaiah 14.K.Ramalingam 15.V.Muthu 16.N.ponnusamy 17.N.Thangarasu 18.M.Muniyappan 19.R.Pappu 20.A.Gunasekaran 21.A.Ramar 22.A.Thanislas 23.K.Katturaja 24.A.Santhappan 25.S.Thangaraj 26.S.Durai 27.P.Periyasamy 28.M.Vellakkannu 29.S.Vincent Xavier 30.P.Veeramalai 31.N.Paramasivam 32.P.Thangaraj 33.A.Andiyappan 34.A.Duraisamy 35.P.Palanisamy 36.I.Subramani 37.M.Annavi 38.M.Palaniappan 2/8

39.S.Yagappan 40.P.Ponnusamy 41.P.Pandian 42.S.Ravi 43.S.Selvaraj 44.M.Karuppaiah 45.M.Nagarethinam 46.A.Palanisamy 47.P.Peter 48.S.Jesuraj 49.N.Adaikkan 50.P.Vellaisamy 51.C.Alagar 52.G.Velanganni 53.P.Rajagopal 54.G.James Xavier 55.S.Jothivel 56.V.Ponnusamy 57.P.Mamundy 58.S.Velu 59.G.Annavi 60.V.Perumal 61.V.Subramanian 62.A.James 63.S.Zaheer Hussain 64.C.Saravanan 65.A.Arulanandam 66.A.Ramanathan 67.R.Perumal 68.A.Vellaithurai 69.A.Vincent Xavier 70.S.Sesuraj 71.K.Sangan 72.A.Pitchan 73.C.Velusamy 3/8

74.A.Periasamy 75.K.Chinnakkannu 76.K.Sankar 77.J.Jesuraj 78.A.Mariyaraj 79.V.Chinnasamy 80.S.Sivasubramanian 81.P.Dharman 82.S.Duraikkannu 83.V.Gurusamy 84.P.Rengan 85.S.Manikandan 86.K.Lakshmanan 87.V.Vairamani 88.C.Arumugam 89.P.Selvam 90.D.Annadurai 91.P.Boopathy 92.A.Pandiyarajan 93.K.Chinnathambi 94.R.Ponnusamy 95.A.Hariraman 96.M.Perumal Raj 97.P.Karuppaiah 98.D.Karthikeyan 99.A.Kannusamy 100.P.Senthil 101.R.Palanisamy 102.K.Sivakumar 103.P.Parthiban 104.P.Sakthivel 105.C.Govindaraj 106.R.Boopathy 107.P.Duraisamy 108.A.Samikannu 4/8

109.C.Saravanan ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the third respondent in proceeding Na.Ka.No.295/2001 dated 20.08.2002 and to quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.Agam Legal For Respondents : Mr.E.Surendaran Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2 R3 to R109 - No Appearance

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the Award passed by the third respondent, Inspector of Labour dated 20.08.2002 under the Tamil Nadu Conferment of Permanent Status of Workman in Industrial Establishments Act. By the impugned award, totally 106 workmen were directed to be conferred permanent status. Those workmen are arrayed as respondent Nos.4 to 109.

5/8

2. When the matter came up for hearing today, Mr.Anand Gopalan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that pending the writ petition, 12(3) settlement was entered into and interms of 12(3) settlement, except one workman involved in the present case namely respondent No.57, Mr.P.Mamundy, everybody else have already been absorbed and they are working in the petitioner management and therefore, nothing further survives in respect of them.

3. In a batch of writ petitions preferred by the petitioner management which was taken along with W.A.No.1302 of 2003, the Hon'ble Division Bench has held that, subsequent 12(3) settlement would govern the field. When the employees have entered into a settlement in terms of the settlement, the management has to absorb them and only one of the workmen not having been found to be eligible and he has also not approached the management nor this Court. Therefore, in respect of him also, in view of the 12(3) settlement, nothing further survives to be adjudicated in the matter.

6/8

4. Accordingly, with the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No Costs.

26.11.2024 Anu To:

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Chennai-9 2.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Labour and Employment Department, Chennai-9.

3.The Labour Inspector, Karur.

D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

anu 7/8

and WPMP.No.39085 of 2003 26.11.2024 8/8