Suresh Babu v. The Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.M.P.No. 34824 of 2025 in 1.N.Suresh Babu 2.M.Vivek 3.C.Malarvizhi 4.C.Chinnathai suji 5.S.jayanthi 6.C.Marypia 7.K.Vasugi 8.S.Kayalvizhi 9.S.J.Padmanabhan 10.N.Anitha 11.L.Karolin Vimala 12.K.Amutha Lakshmi 13.A.R.K. Matha selvam 14.K.Subash Chandran 15.G.Sathiyamurthi 16.Soundararajan.A 17.B.Shanmugam 18.K.Senthil Kumar ..Petitioners Vs 1.The TANGEDCO rep by Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Page Nos.1/6
2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel) The TANGEDCO, 3.P.Murugesan 4.M.Balachandran 5.V.Senthil Kumar 6.Rajan Parthiban.B 7.Subramanian.S 8.Nagarajan.T 9.Sampathkumar.T 10.Rinchumon.V 11.Raajakumar.R 12.Shankar V.K.
13.Meenachisundram.T 14.Ravi Rajakumar.G 15.TNEB Engineers Sangam Rep by its General Secretary, 793, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.
(R15 impleaded vide order of this Court dated 04.06.2014) ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the second respondent in Letter No. 8677/126/G/1/G.11/2013-4 dated 02.03.2013 and memo No. 15979/G15/G151/2013-2 dated 22.04.2013 and 8677/126/G1/G11/2012-13 dated 27.04.2013 quash the same to the limited extent of placement of names of the private Respondents above the names of the Writ Petitioners and issue consequential directions to place the Petitioners as seniors to the Respondents 3 to 14 in the seniority list of Assistant Engineer for Mechanical for the year 2003-2011 and to empanel the Petitioners to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers and further promotions to the next higher posts and to notionally promote the Petitioners with effect from 26th August 2013 and to accordingly grant further higher promotions also well prior to the promotion of private Respondents and to Page Nos.2/6
grant all consequential benefits to the Petitioner herein and to pass such further or other orders.
For Petitioners :Mr.M.Ravi For Respondents :Mr.K.Raj Kumar,Standing Counsel - R1 & R2 No Appearance - For R3 to R9, R11, R12 and R14 For R10 & R13 - Dismissed vide order of this Court dated 29.08.2016 Mr.Sundar Narayan - R15 *****
O R D E R
This Miscellaneous Petition is filed to amend the prayer in the above writ petition, calling for the records on the file of the second respondent in Letter No. 8677/126/G.1/G.11/2013-4 dated 02.03.2013 and memo No. 15979/G15/G151/2013-2 dated 22.04.2013 and 8677/126/G1/G11/2012-13 dated 27.04.2013 quash the same to the limited extent of placement of names of the private Respondents above the names of the Writ Petitioners and issue consequential directions to place the Petitioners as seniors to the Respondents 3 to 14 in the seniority list of Assistant Engineer for Mechanical for the year 2003-2011 and to empanel the Petitioners to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers and further promotions to the next Page Nos.3/6
higher posts and to notionally promote the Petitioners with effect from 26th August 2013 and to accordingly grant further higher promotions also well prior to the promotion of private Respondents and to grant all consequential benefits to the Petitioner herein and to pass such further or other orders.
2. The above writ petition was filed on 19.04.2013. Pending consideration of the writ petition, the official respondents issued another suitability list of Assistant Engineers dated 27.04.2013, by including the names that were erroneously omitted from the earlier list dated 02.03.2013. Consequently, the present amendment petition was filed seeking amendment of the prayer.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is inordinate delay in challenging the suitability list by way of amendment. It was contended that the petitioners have filed the amendment petition to challenge the suitability list dated 27.04.2013, which included the names omitted in the list dated 02.03.2013. However, the proposed amendment does not alter the nature of the writ petition. Moreover, this Court had categorically observed that any promotion granted would be subject to further orders to be passed in the writ petition. Therefore, no prejudice Page Nos.4/6
would be caused to the respondents if the amendment petition is allowed.
4. In view of the aforesaid submissions and considering the relief sought in the petition, the Miscellaneous Petition is ordered accordingly.
5. The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the prayer of the writ petition.
30.01.2026 ak To 1.The Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, 2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel) The TANGEDCO, Page Nos.5/6
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J., ak W.M.P.No. 34824 of 2025 in 30.01.2026 Page Nos.6/6