A.Satheesh Kumar v. The Chief Engineer,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI A.Satheesh Kumar ... Appellant Vs.

1.The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Ramanathapuram Electricity Distribution Circle, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Assistant Engineer (Rural), O/o.Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD).No.16308 of 2013 dated 16.10.2020 on the file of this Court. 1/6

For Appellant : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran For Respondents : Mr.B.Ramanathan, Standing Counsel.

JUDGMENT

(By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant before us. The appellant's father was employed as Wireman in TNEB. He passed away on 31.05.1996. The appellant was aged about eight years during the relevant time. The appellant's mother submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 21.08.2001 seeking employment for the appellant's elder brother. This application was not pursued. The appellant attained majority in the year 2006. He completed Diploma in Mechanical Engineer in April, 2010 and thereafter submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 11.05.2011. His request was rejected vide order dated 05.07.2011. Not deterred by the same, the appellant submitted one more application and it was also rejected on 10.07.2013. Challenging these two rejection orders, the appellant filed W.P.(MD)No.16308 of 2013. The learned Single Judge 2/6

vide order dated 16.10.2020 dismissed the writ petition. Questioning the same, this writ appal has been filed.

2.The learned counsel for the appellant reiterated all the contentions set out in this grounds of appeal. He drew our attention to the order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.669 of 2022 (N.Selvaraj Vs. The Chairman, TNEB, Chennai and Others). The learned counsel submitted that the appellant's mother also passed away in the year 2009 and that the family continues to be in penurious circumstances. He called upon this Court to direct TANGEDCO to hold field inspection and verify the economic status of the appellant and if satisfied, the appellant's application could be favourably considered.

3.Per contra, the learned standing counsel for TANGEDCO submitted that the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition and that the said order does not call for interference. 3/6

4.We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. The learned Single Judge may not be right in his observation that the family condition may not be same due to efflux of time. But then, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the appellant did not submit his application for appointment on compassionate grounds within three years after he attained majority. The appellant was born in the year 1988 but the application for appointment was submitted only in the year 2011. The appellant's father passed away in the year 1996. The writ petition itself was filed after a lapse of 17 years. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the appellant may not have a case to be appointed on compassionate grounds.

5.In this view of the matter, we declined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge and the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

(G.R.S. J.,) & (R.K.M. J.,) 17.02.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias 4/6

5/6

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

and R.KALAIMATHI, J.

ias 17.02.2026 6/6