SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 12708

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
G.PONNURANGAM – Appellant
Versus
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR – Respondent



##PAGE1##

WP No. 2449 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

WP No. 2449 of 2026

and

WMP No. 2697 of 2026

G.Ponnurangam

(Pay Roll No 18697),

S/o K.V. Chinna Govindasamy,

No 10, Iyankulakarai Street,

Murugur, Agoor Post,

Tiruttani, Tiruvallur District-631 209

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Managing Director

Tamil Nadu State Transport,

Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd,

3/137, Salamedu,

Villupuram-605 602

2. The General Manager

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation

(Villupuram) Ltd,

__________

Page1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 02:56:32 pm )

##PAGE2##

WP No. 2449 of 2026

Kancheepuram Region,

Ponnerikarai, NH4,

Madras-Bombay Trunk road,

Kancheepuram-631 561

..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to

issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to continue the petitioner’s

service with suitable alternative light duty without any interruption till his

superannuation as per section 20 (4) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Act 2016 taking note of his disability factor.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Manoj Kumar

For Respondent(s): Ms.S.Pavithra

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents o

continue the petitioner’s service with suitable alternative light duty without any

interruption till his superannuation as per section 20 (4) of the Rights of Persons

with Disabilities Act 2016 taking note of his disability factor.

__________

Page2 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 02:56:32 pm )

##PAGE3##

WP No. 2449 of 2026

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner was working as a Driver in the respondent Corporation and met with

a road accident, in which he sustained multiple injuries in his right knee.

Pursuant to the same, he was provided with light duty. In the year 2020, the

second respondent issued an order re-designating him as Helper Non ITI and

posted him as a Security Guard. In 2023, the petitioner appeared before the

Medical Board and was declared to have 60% permanent disability and was

found unfit to work as a Driver. Consequently, he was posted as a Security

Guard in the Regional Office vide the order of the second respondent.

Thereafter, the second respondent, by its order, directed that the petitioner be

employed only for a period of two months and thereafter be relieved from the

said light duty. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted a representation

to the respondents seeking continuation in service by providing suitable light

duty, taking into consideration his disability and mitigating family

circumstances. However, no orders have been passed on the said representation

till date. Hence, he prayed for appropriate orders.

3.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation

would submit that the petitioner had already been provided with alternative

employment as a Security Guard. However, the petitioner’s representation will

be considered and appropriate orders will be passed thereon.

__________

Page3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 02:56:32 pm )

##PAGE4##

WP No. 2449 of 2026

4.In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the respondents to

refer the petitioner to the Medical Board attached to the Rajiv Gandhi

Government General Hospital, Chennai. If the Medical Board opines that the

petitioner is entitled to be provided with light duty, the respondent Corporation

shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The

said exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, no coercive action shall

be taken by the respondent Corporation and the services of the petitioner shall

not be terminated.

5.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

29-01-2026

Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation:

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top