← Library
Madras High CourtWP/24951/2013disposed of

J.Nagarajan, v. The Chairman,

2020-11-20Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.11.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Writ Petition No.24951 of 2013

1. J.Nagarajan

2. C.Kuppan

3. K.Palani

4. G.Subramani

5. K.Venkatesan

6. K. Panneerselvam

7. Gurubalan

8. Ramesh Babu

9. Rajini ... Petitioners vs.

1. The Chairman, TANGIDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 2.

2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel), TANGIDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai -2.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Thiruvanamalai Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGIDCO, Thiruvanamalai.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to extend the benefit of the orders of this Court made W.P.No.22163 of 2002 consequently direct the respondent Board to regularize petitioners services.

For Petitioners :

Mr.B.Manoharan For Respondents :

Mr. Anand for Mr. T.S.Gopalan & Co.

ORDER

Petitioners have come up with this Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of the order of this Court made in W.P.No.22163 of 2002 and consequently direct the respondent Board to regularize the petitioners' services.

2.

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that, the Petitioners are employees in Vandavasi Rural Electric Cohttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

operative Society Ltd. Though, the said Society was merged with the Electricity Board, the Petitioners were not absorbed into the services of the Respondent Electricity Board. In respect of their grievance, the Petitioners made a representation dated 11.07.2013 to the Respondents. However, the same has not been taken up for consideration so far. Hence, learned counsel prayed that, the representation dated 11.07.2013 made by the Petitioners may be directed to be considered by the Respondents and appropriate orders may be passed within a reasonable time.

3.

In reply, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that, he has no objection to the consideration of the Petitioners' representation by the Respondents, within a reasonable time.

4.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the Petitioners herein to send a copy of the representation dated 11.07.2013 along with a copy of this order and necessary documents to the Respondents within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the Respondents shall consider the representation dated 11.07.2013 made by the Petitioners in the light of the supporting documents sent by them, on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve (12) weeks.

5. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(co) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar av/aeb To

1. The Chairman, TANGIDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 2.

2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel), TANGIDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai -2.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Thiruvanamalai Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGIDCO, Thiruvanamalai.

+1cc to Mr.T.S.Gopalan and co , Advocate SR.No. 37472 W.P.No.24951 of 2013 A.SK(07.01.2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/