N.Janaki Panneer Selvam v. The Chairman
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.04.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI W.A(MD)Nos.527 to 531 of 2026 and CMP(MD)Nos.4840, 4841, 4851, 4853 and 4855 of 2026 N.Janaki Panneer Selvam ... Appellant in W.A.527/26 R.Tinesh Babu ... Appellant in W.A.528/26 R.Vasunanthan ... Appellant in W.A.529/26 G.Donald ... Appellant in W.A.530/26 P.Velayutham ... Appellant in W.A.531/26 Vs.
1. The Chairman, General Insurance Public Sector Association, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Vihar Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chairman cum Managing Director, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Head Office, Oriental House, A-25/27 Asif Ali Road, New Delhi - 110 002.
3. The Chairman cum Managing Director, The New India Assurance Company Ltd,, Head Office, No.85 M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001.
4. The Chairman cum Managing Director, The United India Insurance Company Ltd., 1/6
Head Office, No.24, Whites Road, Chennai - 600 014.
5. The Chairman cum Managing Director, The National Insurance Company Ltd., Head Office, No.3, Middleton Street, Kolkatha - 700 071.
6. The Finance Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Margh, New Delhi-110 001.
... Respondents in all appeals PRAYER:- Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the orders dated 06.03.2024 in W.P(MD)Nos.4589 to 4593 of 2022. For Appellant(in all appeals) : Mr.A.S.Balaji for M/s.R.Thenmozhi For R2 to R5 : Mr.C.Karthick Standing Counsel COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by P.B.BALAJI, J.) The appellants / writ petitioners are agents of insurance companies / respondents 2 to 5. According to them, the 1st respondent convened a meeting on 04.03.2016 and laid down certain guidelines and recommendations for recruitment of Marketing Officers as well as 2/6
Business Associates. According to the appellants, in pursuance of the said meeting held on 04.03.2016, Business Associates have been appointed. However, no call has been taken with regard to the appointment of Marketing Officers.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants invited our attention to the minutes of meeting held on 04.03.2016 and stated that the appellants who are agents of various insurance companies, have to be given preference in being appointed as Marketing Officers. Since no action has been taken in pursuance of the decision taken at the meeting, the appellants moved the Writ Court seeking appointment as Marketing Officers. The learned Single Judge after taking into account the stand of the 4th respondent insurance company who has filed the counter, held that the writ petitioners as a matter of right cannot claim employment in pubic limited companies as it would defeat the principles of equality of opportunity governed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and the writ petitioners' request is amounting to appointment by back-door entry which cannot be granted under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3/6
3. Though the learned counsel for the appellants stated that the 1st respondent did not appear before the Writ Court and state their stand, we do not see any requirement, since respondents 2 to 5 / insurance companies who formed the 1st respondent association, contested the writ petition and clearly stated that the appellants are only agents and they do not have any right to seek regular employment in the insurance companies.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 to 5 Mr.C.Karthick would state that the insurance companies have their own regulations with regard to recruitment of its employees and therefore, by way of filing the writ petition, the agents cannot seek to impose directions on the public sector insurance companies.
5. We have heard and carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants as well as the respondents and we have also perused the order of the Writ Court.
6. The Writ Court has rightly held that the appellants, as a matter of right, cannot seek recruitment as Marketing Officers. Merely 4/6
because the 1st respondent had taken a decision in a meeting held on 04.03.2016 to appoint the agents by giving them preference, it will not clothe the appellants with the right to seek employment, that too by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking direction to be employed as Marketing Officers. We do not find any error in the impugned common order warranting interference in the appeals. There is no merit in these appeals.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [N.S.K., J.] & [P.B.B., J.] 15.04.2026 bala To The Finance Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Margh, New Delhi-110 001.
5/6
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
AND P.B.BALAJI, J.
bala W.A(MD)Nos.527 to 531 of 2026 15.04.2026 6/6