← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/10081/2016dismissed

Arulselvi v. The Chairman

2016-06-13Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.06.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD).No.10081 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD).No.7900 and 7901 of 2016 Arulselvi ...

Petitioner Vs 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board & Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Pudukottai.

3.The Executive Engineer(Distribution), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Pudukottai.

...

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the second respondent in Ka.En.06883/293/NiA/PaPi/Uthavi.3/Ko.Kattu 2015 dated 24.07.2015 and quash the same and directing to the respondents to provide family pension and other benefits to the petitioner.

For petitioner : Mr.S.Ramasamy For Respondents : Mr.Balasubramanian

ORDER

Mrs.Arulselvi challenges the proceedings, dated 24.07.2015, issued by the Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Pudukottai, wherein, it is mentioned that her husband was removed from service.

2. Learned Standing Counsel for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, who appears after taking notice, has produced the order dated 05.09.2014, whereby, the petitioner's husband was removed from service.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. A perusal of the said order would show that the petitioner was not attending duty from 04.11.2013. Notice issued through the registered post for his unauthorised absence did not evoke any response. Subsequently, the respondents removed the petitioner's husband from service. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of removal, dated 05.09.2014, it is always open for her to challenge the same, in the manner known to law, if she desires to do so.

4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that so far, the order of removal passed by the respondents has not been served on her, whereupon, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board served a copy of the same on the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

5. In fine, the Writ Petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said order, dated 05.09.2014. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board & Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Pudukkottai Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Pudukottai.

3.The Executive Engineer(Distribution), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Pudukottai.

+1cc to Mr.S.Ramasamy, Advocate SR.No.29734 ssm sm:SKS-RR:28.06.2016:2P/5C W.P(MD).No.10081 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 13.06.2016