M.Lakshmanan v. The Managing Director
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 20.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI WP(MD)Nos.4754 to 4756 of 2026 M.Lakshmanan ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.4754 of 2026 V.Chinnu ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.4755 of 2026 M.Nagarajan ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.4756 of 2026 Vs
1. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, No.12, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 10.
2. The General Manager (Administration) Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, No.12, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 10.
3. The Regional Manager, Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Madurai Region, BSNL Office, Tallakulam, Madurai.
... Respondents in all W.Ps.
1/7
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioners as Seasonal Bill Clerk in the 3rd respondent Office by granting age relaxation based on their representations dated 07.01.2026 and 09.01.2026. For Petitioner in all W.Ps.
: Mr.L.George Paul Anto For Respondents : Mr.G.Mohan Kumar, Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER The petitioners, who have been engaged as Seasonal Bill Clerk by the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation in the year 2019, have approached this Court, with a grievance that they are having more experience, however, they have crossed the age limit as prescribed by the respondent Corporation in the Notification dated 10.02.2025 and therefore, they have not been considered for this season. 2/7
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, by referring to the earlier order of this Court passed in W.P.(MD)Nos.21167 of 2021, etc. (batch cases) dated 22.12.2021 and another order of this Court passed in W.P.(MD)No.10763 of 2021, dated 07.04.2025, submits that though the respondents have prescribed the age limit for participation in the selection process, this Court, considering their experience in the past, has issued a direction to the respondent/Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation to consider their cases by relaxing the age criteria. Therefore, the learned counsel requests for a similar direction to the respondent/Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation to relax the age criteria to consider the petitioners as seasonal employee for this season also.
3. Mr.G.Mohan Kumar, learned Standing Counsel, takes notice for the respondents and submits that the selection of the petitioners was found irregular and therefore, the appointment of the petitioners as seasonal employee was cancelled by the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, by order dated 23.09.2021. Challenging the same, the 3/7
petitioners and others have filed a batch of writ petitions in W.P. (MD)Nos.21167 of 2021, etc. and this Court, by order dated 22.12.2021, disposed of the writ petitions with a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioners to participate in the selection process, which was scheduled to be conducted in the year 2021. This Court, while disposing of the writ petitions, has also directed the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation to consider the age relaxation, by considering their past experience. However, the petitioners were not selected. Therefore, one of the petitioners, namely, Lakshmanan, has filed a contempt petition in Cont.P.(MD)No.2968 of 2025 that the respondents have not provided age relaxation as directed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.21167 of 2021 (batch cases) and this Court, by order dated 07.11.2025, rejected the contempt petition that there was no positive direction to the respondents to provide age relaxation.
4. The learned Standing Counsel also pointed out that in another order dated 07.04.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.10763 of 2021, referred by the learned counsel for the petitioners, there is no positive direction to the respondents to provide age relaxation. The 4/7
learned Standing Counsel has also produced another order of this Court passed in W.P.(MD)No.2357 of 2020, etc.(batch cases) dated 27.01.2025 and submits that a similar request made by some other seasonal employees for relaxation of age was rejected by this Court. Therefore, the petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right for selection, by providing age relaxation.
5. This Court considered the rival submissions made.
6. This Court has already considered the similar request in W.P. (MD)Nos.2357, 2359, 2364, 2365 and 2368 of 2020 and rejected the same, by order dated 27.01.2025. The relevant portion is extracted as under:
"4. The case of the petitioners is that similarly placed persons have been recruited by the Corporation. The petitioners, who have been appointed on temporary basis, cannot claim it as a matter of right that they have to be engaged for the subsequent seasons also. Further, it is the prerogative of the Department. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain these writ petitions." 5/7
7. In view of the same, all the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs.
20.02.2026 ogy Index : Yes / No.
Internet: Yes / No.
NCC : Yes / No.
To
1. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, No.12, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 10.
2. The General Manager (Administration) Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, No.12, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai - 10.
3. The Regional Manager, Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Madurai Region, BSNL Office, Tallakulam, Madurai.
6/7
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy WP(MD) Nos.4754 to 4756 of 2026 20.02.2026 7/7