Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Anaithu Pothu Thozhilalargal Sangam v. The Chairman And Managing Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Anaithu Pothu Thozhilalargal Sangam, Regd.No.522/TVR, No.301, Vasana Furniture Upstairs, PH Road, Aminjikarai, Chennai - 600 029.

Rep. by its State General Secretary, M.Muniyappan.

..Petitioner Vs

1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 13.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a stipulated time fixed by this Court. For Petitioner:

Mr.J.Antony Jesus For Respondents:

Mr.A.P.Venkatesh Prasad for M/s.ADVIT Law Chambers

ORDER

This writ petition is filed by a trade union. The prayer is to consider the representation dated 13.01.2026.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the representation only seeks regularisation of the employees pursuant to the earlier order in Industrial Dispute No.36 of 2007 dated 09.03.2010.

3. When the matter came up for admission, Mr.A.P.Venkatesh Prasad, the learned counsel taking notice on behalf of the respondents would submit that subsequently, after setting aside the earlier order dated 09.03.2010 in the very same I.D. No.36 of 2007, it was considered afresh and an award was passed on 18.08.2017 dismissing the claim petition filed on behalf of the workman. Even the workman had challenged the same by way of W.P. No.26479 of 2017 and the same was also dismissed by an order dated 22.02.2021. Without disclosing all the same, the present writ petition is filed.

4. In reply thereof, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would point out the operative portion in paragraph No.28 of the earlier writ petition in W.P.No.26479 of 2017 by stating that even in the said writ petition, the petitioner union was given liberty to submit a representation and the

representation was ordered to be considered.

5. I have considered the rival submission made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6. If any earlier direction is not considered, it is for the appropriate petitioner to file a contempt application. As far as the present union is concerned, it was not a party in those earlier proceedings. As far as regularisation is concerned, if the concerned workman had put in more than 480 days of service within two calendar months, it is for them to approach the appropriate authority under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981. Therefore, the present writ petition to consider the representation for regularisation of the service cannot be considered by this Court, especially on the plea of the trade union.

7. With such liberty reserved to the individual workmen to seek appropriate relief, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 23-02-2026 NSL

To

1. The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002.

2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

NSL 23-02-2026