Advocates:
['M/s D Veerasekaran', '', 'J Doraiswamy', 'V Chellappa']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.12.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

WP.No.29172 of 2018

J.Ramesh

Petitioner

Vs

1.The Chief Engineer (Personal)

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TANGEDCO/O&M)

Administrative Branch, Chennai-2

2.The Executive Engineer (O&M)

TNEB CEDC (South), Chennai-16

3.The Assistant Executive Engineer

(O&M), Kundrathur, CEDC (South, Chennai-69

4.The Assistant Engineer, (O&M) (Porur-Rural)

CEDC (South), TANGEDCO, Porur 600016

5.The Assistant Engineer, Operation & Maintanence

Poonamallee, Chennai-56

6.The Assistant Engineer, O&M, (Kundrathur-Rural)

CEDC (South), Chennai-69

Respondents

Prayer:-

This Writ Petition is filed, under the Article 226 of

Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct

the 1st Respondent to consider and pass orders, on the

representation of the Petitioner, dated 02.10.2018 for

regularization of the Petitioner's service rendered in the Tamil

Nadu Electricity Board as considered co-contract labour.

For Petitioner

:Mr.D.Veerasekaran

For Respondents

:Mr.AnandGopalan,Standing Counsel

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

ORDER

The prayer in this Writ Petition is to direct the 1st

Respondent to direct the 1st Respondent to consider and pass

orders, on the representation of the Petitioner, dated

02.10.2018 for regularization of the Petitioner's service

rendered in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board as considered co-

contract labour.

2. By consent of the learned counsel on either side,

this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal, at the

admission stage itself. Mr.Anand Gopalan, learned Standing

Counsel takes notice for the Respondents.

3. This court heard the learned counsel on either side

and also perused the materials placed on record.

4. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner,

the Petitioner was appointed under a scheme for filling up

18,006 posts, which provided for absorption of 4500 existing

workers and 4500 ITI holders in three phases and consequently,

the Respondent Board had observed workers either by the court

directions or by settlement with the Trade Union. Similarly

placed co-contract labours had filed a batch of Writ Petitions

in WP.No.18402 of 2014, etc. and the Respondent Board has

complied with the orders passed in the said Writ Petitions. The

Petitioner has been working till date as a contract labour at

Kundrathur Rural Section. The Petitioner had sent several

representations to the 1st Respondent to regularize him on the

similar lines of regularization of co-contract labours and one

of such last representation is dated 02.10.2018. However, no

orders have been passed on the representations of the

Petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition has been filed, seeking

the relief as stated above.

5. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel for

the Respondent Board would submit that the proper and Competent

Authority to consider the case of the Petitioner is the

Superintending Engineer concerned

and if any fresh

representation is made to the said authority by the Petitioner,

within a specified time, the same will considered and disposed

of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified

time to be specified by this Court.

6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel

on either side and facts and circumstances of the case and the

limited scope of the prayer sought for in this Writ Petition,

without going into the merits of the case, the Petitioner is

permitted to make a fresh representation along with all the

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

relevant documents to the concerned Superintending Engineer,

within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

of this order and on receipt of such representation, the same

shall be disposed of by the said authority, on merits and in