Madras High CourtWP/11974/2014disposed of

R.Sampson v. The Chairman Cum Managing

2015-02-09Honourable Mr Justice K.K. Sasidharan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.02.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN Writ Petition No.

11974 of 2014 and MP.No.01 of 2014

1. R.Sampson

2. D.Sugumar

3. M.Venkatesan

4. K.Arun Kumar

5. M.Peter

6. D.Jacob

7. E.Nagalingam

8. K.Mohanasundaram

9. L.Raghu 10.L.Suresh 11.L.Jagan 12.G.Murugan 13.J.Suresh

...Petitioners

Vs.

1. The Chairman -cum- Managing Director Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Ltd N.P.K.R.R.Maligai Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai Chennai - 600 002.

2. The Managing Director TANGEDCO Ltd N.P.K.R.R.Maligai Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai Chennai - 600 002.

3. The Chief Engineer (Personnel) TANGEDCO Ltd N.P.K.R.R.Maligai Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai Chennai - 600 002.

4. The Superintending Engineer Kancheepuram Electricity Distribution Circle TANGEDCO Ltd (TNEB) Kancheepuram.

5. The Executive Engineer (O &M ) TANGEDCO Ltd., (TNEB)/North/KEDC Thiruvallur.

...Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners pursuant to their engagement as Contract Labourers from 1997 under the 5th respondent herein and absorb them in regular establishment of the TANGEDCO (TNEB) Commensurate with their educational qualifications and experiences with all consequential monetary and service benefits For Petitioner :

Mr.A.R.Suresh For respondent :

Mrs.R.Varalakshmi

O R D E R

The petitioners claim that they have been working under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., (hereinafter referred as TANGEDCO) right from the year 1997. The petitioners made a request to the fourth respondent to regularise their services. The 5th respondent appears to have recommended the case of the petitioners for regularization. Since there was no follow up action taken by the fourth respondent, the petitioners are before this Court.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the currency of the writ petition, the fourth respondent passed an order regularising the services of one of the claimants. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners are similarly situated and as such, their services should also to be regularised by the competent authority.

3. The fourth respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioners for regularization taking into account the recommendation made by the fifth respondent. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ga