P.Devarajan - Line Inspector v. Tamil Nadu Electricity

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-01-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WP Nos. 23698 to 23712 of 2018 P.Devarajan - Line Inspector S/o.Periyasamy, Mela Kadu, Kattukkottai, Paithadurai Post, Chinnasalem, Villupuram - 606 201 Petitioner(s) Vs

1.Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, rep by its Chairman cum Managing Director No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-02

¶2Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-02

¶3Superintending Engineer, Kallakurichi Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, JDC, Kallakurichi - 606202 Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, to declare the action of the respondent corporation in not taking into account of the 50% of the service rendered as temporary casual labourers/nominal muster roll for the purpose of pension as illgal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently, direct the respondents to take into account of the 50% of the service rendered by the petitioner as temporary casual labourer/nominal muster roll while calculating pension and on that basis arrive at the pension and pay the same on the superannuation of the petitioner. For Petitioner(s): M/s.Balan Haridas For Respondent(s): Mr.G.Anandakrishnan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co COMMON ORDER All these Writ Petitions have been filed against the action of the respondent Corporation in not taking into account of the service rendered by the petitioners as temporary casual labourer/nominal muster roll for the purpose of pension, which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and also sought for consequential direction to the respondents to take into account the 50% of the service rendered by them as temporary casual labourer/nominal muster roll while calculating pension at the time of their superannuation.

¶2It appears that the petitioners have made representations to the respondents on different dates from 02.03.2017 to 03.05.2017, requesting the respondents, to extend the benefit of taking into account of 50% of the service rendered prior to their absorption, for the purpose of pension as was granted to other similarly placed persons.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the said representations are still pending with the respondents and so far no orders have been passed.

4.The learned counsel for the respondents also accepted that the representations of the petitioners have been pending with the respondents and the same will be considered and disposed of within the time frame as per the directions of this Court. He further submits that if the petitioners intend to submit the representations afresh, the same will also be considered and disposed of within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and after hearing the respective learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that there is no dispute with regard to the facts of the case. The only issue to be considered is whether the petitioners are entitled to count 50% of their earlier service rendered prior to the absorption for the purpose of pension or not? Admittedly, the petitioners have submitted their representations to the respondents in the year 2017 itself and the said representations are still pending with them. In these circumstances, in our considered view, justice would be met, by directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners and dispose of the same within the stipulated time. If the petitioners are interested to submit the representations afresh, they can submit the same.

¶6Considering the fact that the representations of the petitioners have been pending with the respondents from the year 2017, it is appropriate to direct the respondents to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks.

7.Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representations submitted by the petitioners, within a period of four (4) weeks from today. However, if the petitioners are interested to make fresh representations, they are permitted to do so. No costs.

03.01.2025 Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dn To

¶1Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, rep by its Chairman cum Managing Director No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-02

¶2Chief Engineer (Personnel) Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-02

¶3Superintending Engineer Kallakurichi Electricity Distribution Circle Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd, JDC, Kallakurichi - 606202 BATTU DEVANAND, J dn

Writ Petition Nos.

03.01.2025