P.Thanasekaran v. The Cheif Engineer (Personal)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 12.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. P.Thanasekaran

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Chief Engineer (Personal) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Namakkal Building Mount Road, Chennai-600 002.

...Respondent

Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2025 conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders.

1/6

For Petitioner :

Ms. S.Shamini For Respondents :

Mr. K.Raj Kumar Standing Counsel.

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for the relief of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.08.2025 conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he initially joined as a contract worker in the respondent Board in the year 1988. In the year 1991, though his services were regularised, no appointment order was issued. It is submitted that appointment orders were issued to 20 other persons on regularisation. The petitioner retired from service in the year 2020. In this regard, the petitioner sent a representation dated 05.08.2025. However, there is no response till date. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

2/6

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 05.08.2025 has not been considered so far and prayed that a direction may be issued to the respondent to consider the representation and pass orders on merits.

4. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner, had earlier accepted the terms of the appointment in the year 1999 and thereafter he retired from service in the year 2020. He further submitted that the petitioner, having accepted the terms of appointment earlier, is now seeking retrospective appointment from the year 1991, which cannot be entertained and prayed for dismissal of the present Writ Petition.

5. Heard the learned counsels on the either side and perused the records.

6. Having gone through the records it is seen that the petitioner 3/6

has made a representation on 05.08.2025. However, the same has not been considered to this date. It is the duty of the respondent to give a reply to the petitioner's representation and pass suitable orders, without keeping the representation pending for a long time.

7. Accordingly, the respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.08.2025, in accordance with law and on its own merits. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation with regard to the merits of the case.

8. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs.

12.09.2025 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No kan 4/6

To The Chief Engineer (Personal) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Namakkal Building Mount Road, Chennai-600 002.

A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

5/6

kan 12.09.2025 6/6