Madras High Court
S.P.Karthi vs The Chief Engineer / Personnel ... on 27 April, 2022
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A(MD)No. 381 of 2022
and C.M.P.(MD) No. 3885 of 2022
S.P.Karthi .. Appellant
Vs
1.The Chief Engineer / Personnel (A/C),
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited,
(TANGEDCO),
8th Floor, NPKRR Maaligai,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited,
(TANGEDCO),
Dindigul District.
3.Mrs.A.Gomathi,
Adm. Supervisor,
Palladam Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tirupur District. .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 24.03.2022 made in W.P.(MD) No. 11066 of
2021.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimman
for M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
For Respondents : Mr.S.Arivalagan
for R1 & R2
No appearance for R3
JUDGMENT
[Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.]
Challenge in this writ appeal is made to the order dated 24
March 2022 recorded on W.P(MD) No.11066 of 2021. This appeal is
by the writ petitioner.
2. The petitioner had challenged the transfer order which
was initially stated to have been stayed but subsequently the writ
petition is dismissed.
3. Learned advocate for the writ petitioner/appellant has
made serious grievance that, the petitioner was not permitted to
join at the place where from he was transferred in spite of the
interim protection granted by this Court and that has escaped notice
of learned Single Judge while recording the final order. It is
submitted that, this appeal be entertained.
4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective
parties and having considered the material on record this Court
finds that, the petitioner had stayed at the place where from he was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
transferred for a period exceeding three years. The said transfer
under no circumstances could be termed to be against the policy of
the employer and the dismissal of the petition, according to us, can
not be said to be erroneous in any manner which may called for any
interference in this intra-court appeal. This appeal therefore needs
to be dismissed.
5. So far the grievance with regard to the interregnum
period is concerned, we do not find anything which can be said to be
against the petitioner. However, if any grievance is there with regard
to the benefit of service from the date of transfer to the actual date
of his reporting duty at the new place, that may be treated to be a
separate cause of action and as and when the occasion arises, the
same may be agitated and gone into by the appropriate forum.
6. This writ appeal is disposed of with the above
observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition would not survive.
(P.U., J) (R.V., J)
27.04.2022
Index : No
pkn/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
To
1.The Chief Engineer / Personnel (A/C),
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited,
(TANGEDCO),
8th Floor, NPKRR Maaligai,
144, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 2.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Dindigul Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited,
(TANGEDCO),
Dindigul District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
pkn
W.A(MD)No.381 of 2022
27.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
