Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7105/2022disposed of

Thirulogachandar v. The Superintending Engineer

2022-04-18Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Thirulogachandar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintending Engineer, Karur Division, TNEB Complex, 2.The Executive Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance-Urban], TANGEDCO, TNEB Complex, 3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance], TANGEDCO, TNEB Complex, Manmangalam, Karur.

4.The Assistant Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance], Panjamadevi Post, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District.

... Respondents P RAYER:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to give adequate compensation to the petitioner for Electrocution Death of the petitioner's son namely one Saravanan, on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2020. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabhakaran For Respondents : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel

O R D E R

*********** This Writ Petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to the respondents to give adequate compensation to the petitioner for the electrocution death of the petitioner's son by name Saravanan, based on the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2020.

1/3

2.According to the petitioner, his son Saravanan died due to electrocution on 14.06.2019. The petitioner has sought for compensation from the respondents under his representation dated 05.06.2020. Since the said representation has not been considered till date, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3.Heard Mr.M.Prabhakaran, learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, learned Standing Counsel who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

4.No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation is considered on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner claims compensation for the death of his son Saravanan on account of the alleged electrocution. However, the same is disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is for the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner. 5.For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2020 seeking compensation for the death of his son Saravanan on account of electrocution and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner including granting him the right of personal hearing within a period of three [3] months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-II) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) MR To 1.The Superintending Engineer, Karur Division, TNEB Complex, 2/3

2.The Executive Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance-Urban], TANGEDCO, TNEB Complex, 3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance], TANGEDCO, TNEB Complex, Manmangalam, Karur.

4.The Assistant Engineer, [Operation and Maintenance], Panjamadevi Post, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District.

+1 CC to M/s.S. DEENADHAYALAN, Advocate ( SR-19494[F] dated 19/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.M.. PRABHAKARAN, Advocate ( SR-19505[F] dated 19/04/2022 ) ORDER MADE IN 18.04.2022 sb(CO) GC(02.05.2022) 3P 7C 3/3