Anandhan v. The Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH 1.Anandhan 2.Ravi 3.Munusamy 4.Elangovan 5.Muniyandi 6.Senthil Kumar 7.Muthuraman 8.Chinnamani 9.Sundaramurthy 10.Paranjothi

...Petitioners

Vs 1.The Chairman cum Managing Director, TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Chief Engineer [Personnel], TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents namely the 1/6

Chairman cum Managing Director, TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002, the first respondent and the Chief Engineer [Personnel], TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002, the second respondent herein to taken into account the period of service rendered by the petitioners in the erstwhile Vandhavasi Rurual Electric Co-operative Society or in the alternate atleast from 06.04.2002 on which date the petitioners became the Board employees namely for fixation of their seniority with all attendant benefits like seniority etc. as claimed in the petitioners representations dated 30.12.2022 and the in remainder dated 24.01.2023.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Elamurugan For Respondents : Mr.K.Rajkumar Standing Counsel for TANGEDCO

ORDER

With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The prayer sought for in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners, together with consequential attendant benefits. In this regard, the petitioners had given 2/6

a representation on 30.12.2022. The said representation has not been considered by the respondents till date. Hence, the petitioners have preferred the present Writ Petition.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioners herein had belatedly approached this Court, after a lapse of 21 years.

4. I am not in appreciation of such an objection. The limited relief which is being sought for in this Writ Petition is on account of dereliction of duty on the part of the respondents in having failed to consider the petitioners' representation in time. If the respondents were of the view that the petitioners have belatedly approached, they ought to have rejected the representation instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. Such dereliction of duty would empower this Court to invoke its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India and thereby direct them to consider the petitioners' request. 3/6

5. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 30.12.2022, in the light of the proceedings in Per.B.P.(FB) No.31, dated 20.09.2005, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioners and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

08.06.2023 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk 4/6

To 1.The Chairman cum Managing Director, TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Chief Engineer [Personnel], TANGEDCO, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

5/6

M.S.RAMESH,J.

hvk 08.06.2023 6/6