← Library
Madras High CourtWP/18090/2025disposed of

S. Bharathi v. The Chief Engineer

2025-06-06Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S.Bharathi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, No.10, East Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Vellore.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Balammal Colony, Tirupattur-635 601.

3. Jagadeesan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2025 seeking stoppage of entire retirement benefits, till realization of entire amount attached by the Court of law to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.PA.Sudesh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.C.Manoharan Standing Counsel for TNEB for R1 & R2 ***** 1/4

O R D E R

The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the relief of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.03.2025 seeking stoppage of entire retirement benefits, till realization of entire amount attached by the Court of law to the petitioner.

2. Heard Mr.PA.Sudesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Manoharan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 3rd respondent is the husband of the petitioner. It is the submission of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent is not providing maintenance to the petitioner, in spite of receiving a salary of nearly Rs.1,23,058/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the learned Judicial Magistrate has passed order of attachment, attaching the salary of the 3rd respondent to the tune of Rs.11,52,000/-. Hence, the petitioner has sent the representation on 20.03.2025 requesting the respondent not to disburse the benefits of the 3rd respondent. However, the same has not been considered by the respondents 1 and 2.

2/4

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the 3rd respondent retired on 30.04.2025 and all the amount has been disbursed and nothing left with the employer so as to withhold with them. Though the learned counsel for the respondent disputes the submission of the petitioner, the factum of the pendency of the representation with them is not in dispute.

5. In such view of the matter, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representation and pass order within a period of six(6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court according to it's own merits and in accordance with law.

6. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs. 06.06.2025 kmi Index :Yes/No Speaking Order NCC: Yes/No 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

kmi To

1. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, No.10, East Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Vellore.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Balammal Colony, Tirupattur-635 601.

06.06.2025 4/4