The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of maintaining the rank list and seniority for selected candidates, as governed by Regulation 97 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the first respondent relating to the Board Proceedings Ms.No. 733 dated 16.06.1975 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to Regulation 97 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations and in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to publish the seniority list of Junior Assistants/Accounts recruited through selection conducted pursuant to notification No.02/2016 dated 29.02.2016 in terms of Regulation 97 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations and consider them for promotion to the post of Assistant based on that by considering their representation dated 12.06.2019.)

1. The Writ Petition has been filed by two petitioners who both stand on equal footing and therefore, after obtaining necessary permission as is required under the Rules have filed a single Writ Petition.

2. The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records of the first respondent /the Chairman cum Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., at Chennai, relating to Board Proceedings Ms.No. 733, dated 16.06.1975 and quash the same as being contrary to Regulation 97 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and to direct the first and second respondents /the Chairman cum Managing Director and the Chief Engineer/Personnel, both of Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd., at Chennai, to publish the seniority list of Junior Assistants/Accounts recruited through selection conducted consequent to notification No.02/2016 dated 29.02.2016 in accordance with Regulation 97 aforementioned. The petitioners seek that they should be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant on the basis of a representation given by them dated 12.06.2019.

3. Even before entering into any further discussion either on facts or on the arguments, let me make it very clear that since the issue involved in the Writ Petition can be examined only on the basis of Regulation 97 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations alone, the Court is not examining Board Proceedings Ms.No. 733 dated 16.06.1975.

4. Arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner was to place reliance on the same more on the aspect that it is not applicable to the petitioners herein. No arguments were advanced that is violative of any rules or regulations. The petitioners place reliance on Regulation 97 aforementioned and this Court has answered the issues raised in the Writ Petition based only on Regulation 97 and not on Board Proceedings Ms.No.733 dated 16.06.1975.

5. Both the writ petitioners have been selected on direct recruitment to the post of Junior Assistant / Accounts consequent to an examination conducted under the aegis of the respondents in the year 2016-2018. The selection process was by a written examination for a period of two hours for 85 marks out of 100 marks and the balance 15 marks was to be awarded for an interview to be conducted. Both the petitioners along with others had appeared for the examination. Totally 250 candidates had been declared successful. There were yet another 13 candidates, who have been placed in the waiting list. The list has been filed as a document to the Writ Petition. The list contains serial Nos. 1 to 250, who were actually given posting orders and of-course, the remaining 251-263, who had been categorised in the waiting list. No arguments were advanced with respect to the candidates in the waiting list.

6. In so far as the list of 1 to 250 candidates, the first petitioner was ranked 56, having secured a total of 45.65 marks. The second petitioner was ranked 13 having secured a total of 54.73 marks. The petitioners seek this ran