N. KESAVAN vs TAMILNADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

Court
Madras High Court

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
and MP Nos.1 of 2007, 1 & 1 of 2009
WP No.37337/2007
CNR:{HCMA010148452007}
1. N. Kesavan
2. P. Muralidharan
3. A.Ziaullah
4. K.Rasappa
5. R.Jayaraman
6. P.Easwaramoorthy
7. T.Vasudevan
8. R.Balakrishnan
9. B.Allaudheen
10.C.Ponnuswamy
11.K.Thangarajan
12.S.I.Ahamed
13.N.Gunasekaran
__________
Page1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
14.A.Gopal
15.T.Mariappan
16.S.Kejapal
17.S.Rathinavel
18.A.Nedunchezhian
19.N.Krishnamoorthy
20.A.Ilango
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Rep. by its Chairman,
800, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board - Workshop Circle,
Mettur Dam-1, Salem District.
3. K.Palanivel,
Junior Engineer - Operation & Efficiency,
SE/Mechanical II, Mettur Thermal Power Station,
..Respondent(s)
Mettur Dam-1, Salem District.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
st nd
praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 and 2
respondents to promote the petitioners to JE Grade-I, placing them above the
rd
3 respondent with all monetary and consequential benefits based on the
Award of the Labour Court, Salem, in ID.No.104/95 dt: 28.2.97 as
__________
Page2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
confirmed by the judgment of this Court dt: 6.7.06 in WP.No.2130/1998,
award costs.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Govardhanan
for M/s.Row and Reddy
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Rajkumar,
Standing Counsel (TANGEDCO)
WP No. 683 of 2009
CNR: {HCMA010187582009}
..Petitioner(s)
T.Selvaraj
Vs
1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Rep. by its Chairman Engineer/Personnel,
Old No.800, New No.144,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 2.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Mettur Workshop Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Mettur Dam – 1.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records pertaining to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Memo
No.1035/Ni.Pi./U3/Ko.Thani/08-2, dt 20.12.08, quash the same and forbear
__________
Page3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
the respondents from withdrawing the benefits given as per Award dated
28.02.97 in I.D.No.104/95 of the Labour Court, Salem as confirmed by this
Court in the order dated 06.07.06 in W.P.No.2130/98 by treating the
petitioner on par with Mr.Palanivel.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Manish Kumar
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Rajkumar,
Standing Counsel (TANGEDCO)
WP No. 684/2009
CNR: {HCMA010187642009}
..Petitioner(s)
S.Selvakumar
Vs
1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Rep. by its Chairman Engineer/Personnel,
Old No.800, New No.144,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 2.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Mettur Workshop Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Mettur Dam – 1.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
__________
Page4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
records pertaining to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Memo
No.1035/Ni.Pi./U3/Ko.Thani/08-2, dt 20.12.08, quash the same and direct
the respondents not to cancel the order in Office Memo
No.370/Adm/A3/F/Promotion/06, dt 12.1.07, by giving the petitioner’s
promotion and seniority on par with Mr.K.Palanivel with all consequential
benefits.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Manish Kumar
For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Rajkumar,
Standing Counsel (TANGEDCO)
COMMON ORDER
It is the case of the writ petitioners that they are on par with
Mr.P.Kannan, who was promoted by way of I.D.No.104 of 1995 dated
28.02.1997, which was subsequently confirmed by this Court in
W.P.No.2130 of 1998 dated 06.07.2006. The petitioners relied upon
paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said order, which read as under:
…. “4. The Labour Court gave a finding that without
getting option from the said P.Kannan, the other Juniors
were given promotion and if option was obtained from
P.Kannan, he would have opted to go for other stream and
__________
Page5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
could have got promotion earlier to the said four persons.
Both the posts are interchangeable and the same is also
accepted by the Board by preparing common seniority list in
the year 1995. Therefore, the action of the petitioner
management without obtaining option from P.Kannan, was
found erroneous by the Labour Court. On any account
admittedly the said Kannan being the senior, is entitled to get
pay protection as senior. Hence Kannan is entitled to get his
pay fixed under Fundamental Rule 22 (b).
5. As the petitioner Board itself issued a common
seniority list bringing all the persons in the same seniority
list, taking note of their entry into the service, P. Kannan is
entitled to get his due seniority. The Labour Court on a
finding of fact, came to the conclusion that the said
P.Kannan, who is senior, having been denied promotion,
directed the management to give promotion on the date when
the other four junior persons were given promotion and to
place P.Kannan above in the seniority list. The said factual
finding cannot be treated as perverse finding ….”
2. The respondents contended that this Court ought not to entertain
writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arguing that if
the petitioners have any grievances, they must approach the Labour Court
__________
Page6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
just as the other individuals did. On these grounds, they prayed for the
dismissal of the writ petitions.
3. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Standing Counsel for
the respondents.
4. This Court, in its order dated 06.07.2006 in W.P.No.2130 of 1998,
clearly stated that Mr.P.Kannan is entitled to promotion, and the re-fixation
of his seniority has also been carried out. This Court also directed the
management to re-fix his pay as per Fundamental Rule 22(b).
5. The case of the writ petitioners is that they are on par with
Mr.P.Kannan. However, the issue regarding seniority can only be
considered by the Labour Court if the parties approach it by way of separate
Industrial Dispute applications.
6. In view of the same, the writ petitioners are at liberty to approach
the Labour Court for appropriate relief, citing the case of Mr.P.Kannan. If
such an application is filed, the Labour Court is directed to consider the case
__________
Page7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
on its merits without insisting on the limitation period, and to pass
appropriate orders. The Labour Court is also directed to take note of the
order in W.P.No.2130 of 1998 regarding its applicability, and to dispose of
the matter within a period of four (4) months from the date of filing of the
application.
7. With these observations, the writ petitions stand disposed of. No
costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed.
26-10-2026
(3/3)
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Sni
__________
Page8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
To
1.The Chairman Engineer/Personnel,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Old No.800, New No.144,
Anna Salai, Chennai – 2.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Mettur Workshop Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Mettur Dam – 1,
Salem District.
__________
Page9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )

WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN J.
Sni
WP Nos.37337 of 2007, 683 & 684 of 2009
26-10-2026
__________
Page10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 05:13:20 pm )