P.Arun Kumar v. The Chief Engineer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30/10/2025 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K. SURENDER Writ Petition No.33842 of 2016 P. Arunkumar ...
Petitioner Vs
1. The Chief Engineer Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd No.144 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002.
2. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd No.144 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002.
...
Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to revise the selection list dated 26/2/2014, vide Proceedings No.Nil and include the name of the petitioner in the selection list. For petitioner ...
Mr.A.Aathimoolam 1/5
For respondents ...
Mr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for Mr.K.Raj Kumar (TANGEDCO) - - - - -
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to revise the selection list dated 26/2/2014, vide Proceedings No.Nil and include the name of the petitioner in the selection list.
2. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:- The petitioner is a Diploma Holder who had appeared for an interview in the Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., for the post of Technical Assistant/Electrical/Mechanical on 12/12//2013. After the interview was over, selection list was issued on 26/2/2014, wherein, the name of the petitioner did not find place in the selection list. According to the petitioner, he had submitted a representation on 12/5/2016, i.e., nearly 2 years and 3 months after the selection list was issued alleging 2/5
that a flawed selection process was followed, resulting in the name of the petitioner not being found in the selection list.
3. Heard Mr.A.Aathimoolam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav, learned counsel for the respondents.
4. When the petitioner's counsel is questioned as to how this Court can issue directions revise the selection list, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondents have not even responded to the representation of the petitioner dated 12/5/2016. Learned counsel further submitted that it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 12/5/2016.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in the event of the petitioner providing proof to the effect that the representation dated 12/5/2016 was actually made, the respondents shall respond to the said representation and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
3/5
6. Recording the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (K.SURENDER,J) 30th October, 2025 mvs.
Index: Yes/No To
1. The Chief Engineer Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd No.144 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002.
2. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd No.144 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002.
K.SURENDER, J mvs.
4/5
30/10/2025 5/5