K.Balaguru v. The Chief Engineer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.03.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD K.Balaguru, Revenue Supervisor/Retd., Flat No.44, 7th street, Iyappa Nagar, Madipakkam, Chennai-91.

...Petitioner

-Vs1.The Chief Engineer, Service, (TNEB), Anna Salai, Chennai-2.

2.The Superintendent Engineer, CEDC/Central, TANGEDCO (TNEB), Valluvar Kottam High Road, Chennai-34.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records comprised in 'order in appeal' vide memo 011652/657/ADM.IV/A.1/F.D.P/2002 dated 28.06.2002 and the correction order vide memo No.011652/657/ADM.IV/A.1/F.D.P/2002-1 dated 01.03.2003 where in this petitioner was imposed punishment of "stopping of annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect" and quash 1/4

the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant the increments and other monetary benefits which the respondents had stopped based on the above punishment and pass such further orders. For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Vediappan For Respondents :

Mr.David Sundar Singh Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the memo 011652/657/ADM.IV/A.1/F.D.P/2002 dated 28.06.2002 and the correction order vide memo No.011652/657/ADM.IV/A.1/F.D.P/2002-1 dated 01.03.2003, wherein the petitioner was imposed punishment of "stopping of annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect" and consequently direct the respondents to grant the increments and other monetary benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has no instructions despite his efforts to contact the petitioner.

3. The petitioner was imposed with the punishment of "stopping of 2/4

annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect" in the year 2002 and the same was challenged after a delay of 10 years. At the time of filing the writ petition, the petitioner was 65 years. Now he is 77 years. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

4. In view of the above submission, the writ petition stands dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. No costs. 18.03.2024 cda Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order To 1.The Chief Engineer, Service, (TNEB), Anna Salai, Chennai-2.

2.The Superintendent Engineer, CEDC/Central, TANGEDCO (TNEB), Valluvar Kottam High Road, Chennai-34.

J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

cda 3/4

18.03.2024 4/4