Minor Puviyarasu v. The Chairman and Managing

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) Writ order dated 08.03.2023 passed in W.P.No.22026 of 2018 is under challenge in the present intra-court appeal.

¶2Writ petitioner is the appellant. Writ for grant of compensation has been instituted by the appellant claiming a sum of Rs.92 lakhs towards damages for suffering and for the negligence of TANGEDCO. Minor appellant sustained injuries in his right hand due to electrocution and consequently right hand got amputated. Under the scheme for grant of compensation, as per TANGEDCO proceedings dated 14.11.2019, a sum of Rs.2 lakhs is permissible. Writ court has directed TANGEDCO to pay the said sum of Rs.2 lakhs. Not satisfied with the said amount of compensation, present appeal came to be instituted.

¶3Learned counsel for appellant would mainly contend that writ Court in exercise of powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is empowered to grant higher compensation than that of the compensation fixed by TANGEDCO. He would rely on certain judgments to show that compensation has been granted by the High Courts. However, this Court is of the considered view that adjudication of disputed facts is impermissible in writ proceedings. Negligence on the part of TANGEDCO, if any, is to be established through documents and evidences. High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry in respect of such accident and therefore, the minor appellant has to approach competent civil Court for higher compensation. Writ Court has granted the relief as per the fixed compensation under the TANGEDCO Scheme. If appellant claims any higher compensation then negligence and other requirements for claiming higher compensation are to be established in the manner known to law.

¶4Granting liberty to the appellant to approach the competent civil Court, writ appeal stands disposed of. In the event of preferring any civil suit, the period during which the writ petition and writ appeals are pending before the High Court will stand excluded. There shall be no order as to costs. [S.M.S, J.] [V.L.N., J.]

31.10.2025 Index:Yes/No mmi To

1.The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

2.The Chief Engineer, Distribution, South, TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

3.The Superintending Engineer, South I, TANGEDCO, 110 KV Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

4.The Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, 110 KV Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

5.The Assistant Executive Engineer/ Kundrathur, TANGEDCO, No.2, Vellar Street, Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069.

6.The Assistant Engineer, Kundrathur (R), TANGEDCO, No.2, Vellar Street, Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069.

W.A.oNo.2000oofo2023 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,eJ. AND V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,eJ. mmi W.A.eNo.2000eofe2023

31.10.2025 Pageo5oofo5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Minor Puviyarasu rep. By his father and Natural Guardian Mr.Sekar ... Appellant Vs. 1.The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 2.The Chief Engineer, Distribution, South, TANGEDCO, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3.The Superintending Engineer, South I, TANGEDCO, 110 KV Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078. 4.The Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, 110 KV Complex, K.K.Nagar, Chennai – 600 078. 5.The Assistant Executive Engineer/ Kundrathur, TANGEDCO, No.2, Vellar Street, Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069. 6.Assistant Engineer, Kundrathur (R), TANGEDCO, No.2, Vellar Street, Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069. ... Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 08.03.2023 made in W.P. No.22026 of 2018. For Appellant : Mr.K.R.Arun Shabari For Respondents : No apperance