Madras High Court
P.Moorthy vs The Chairman on 3 January, 2024
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P.No.35683 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.01.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.No.35683 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.35658 of 2023
1.P.Moorthy
2.M.Ponmanam ...Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
No.800, Anna Salai
Chennai – 600 002.
2.The Chief Engineer,
North Chennai Thermal Power Project
Ennore, Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
4.The Tahsildar
Ponneri Taluk,
Ponneri
Thiruvallur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 9
W.P.No.35683 of 2023
5.The Secretary to Department
Labour and Employment Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying
for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records
and proceeding in fojvz;/j/bgh`rp/guht/br/mkp/ep?1 ntiytha;g;g[-
vz;/8932018. dated, 16.08.2018, and the consequential order in f/vz;/
jbgh- nk/bgh- nk/bgh- rP/guh- tbr/mkp/ep?1 -ntiytha;g;g[-
vz;/1487-dated 25.03.2019, of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and
direct the respondents 1 and 2 to provide employment to the 2nd petitioner in the
1st respondent Board.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Kamesh Kannan
For R1 & R2 : Ms.V.M.Sreenidhi for M/S.Agam legal
For R3 to R5 : Mr.S.Rajesh
Government Advocate.
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order
dated 25.03.2019 passed by the second respondent, thereby rejected the
application seeking for employment for acquisition of land owned by the 1st
petitioner's father.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The 1st petitioner's father owned land comprised in Survey No.
970/1 situated at Vallur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District. It was
acquired for the purpose of constructing Housing Quarters and for laying of
road for the employees of North Madras Thermal Power Project. In the year
1990, the 1st petitioner's father received compensation for the land acquired for
the said purpose. As per G.O.Ms.No.656, Labour and Employment, dated
29.06.1978, the employment assistance has to be given to one of the members
of each family from whom the lands were acquired for the said purpose. Even
till the year 2005, no application was made for employment of any of the family
members of the land owner. The first petitioner made an application on
24.10.2005 seeking employment for his son viz, the second petitioner herein.
4. A perusal of the records reveals that there is no proof to show
that the first petitioner submitted an application seeking appointment on
24.10.2005. Subsequently, he made an application on 20.02.2019 seeking
employment for the second petitioner. It was rejected by the impugned order
dated 25.03.2019. Hence, the writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted
that though it was filed belatedly, the second petitioner, being the grandson, is
entitled for employment for the land acquired from his grandfather. Though the
application dated 24.10.2005 was duly received in the impugned order, it was
not referred by the second respondent. He also cited the Judgment of this Court
in W.P.No.34725 of 2007 dated 24.06.2013 in the case of R.Balaji Vs. The
Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai and others, in which, this
Court held that the grandson is entitled for employment on the land owned by
his grandfather and when the land was acquired by the Tamil Nadu Electricity
Board on the ground that father and grandfather are aged about 70 years and 90
years respectively. He also cited another Judgment of this Court in
W.P.Nos.26956, 26958, 26526 & 26529 of 2018 dated 25.08.2022, in which,
this Court held that the delay in filing the application seeking employment also
would show since the Board proceedings in B.P.No.14/2018 was issued only in
the year 2018 and as such, three years limitation cannot be put against the
petitioners, since the land was acquired in the year 1990.
6. In the case on hand, admittedly, the land owned by the 1 st
petitioner's father, was acquired in the year 1990. The petitioner as well as the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
original land owner slept over the matter, without any employment, till the year
2019. Immediately, the second respondent considered the application and it
was rejected by the impugned order dated 25.03.2019 on the ground that the
grandson is not entitled for any employment for the acquisition of land owned
by the grandfather, since the land owner, son of the land owner, wife,
unmarried daughter and adopted son are only entitled to have employment for
the acquisition of land.
7. A perusal of the proceedings dated 31.05.1983 issued by the
Chief Engineer, reveals that the acquired land should have been the only or
major source of sustenance for that family which fact should be certified by the
Superintending Engineer concerned. Appointment shall be given to self or
wife/husband/son/unmarried daughter, legally adopted son of the land owner.
The above conditions may be strictly be followed.
8. Insofar the delay is concerned, the Board proceedings which is
referred in the order dated 16.08.2018, shows that the request made by the first
petitioner was rejected only on the ground that the grandson is not entitled to
seek any employment on the acquisition of the land owned by his grandfather.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Thereafter, without challenging the earlier order dated 16.08.2018, the first
petitioner made another application seeking employment, it was rejected by an
order dated 25.03.2019. Therefore, the question of delay does not arise in this
case. Even assuming that the claim of the first petitioner was rejected on the
ground of delay, since the land was acquired in the year 1990, after a period of
29 years, the first petitioner made an application seeking employment for his
son viz., the second petitioner. That apart, the request was rejected by an order
dated 25.03.2019. This Writ Petition has been filed only in the year 12.12.2023
i.e., after a period of 5 years. This Writ Petition itself is not filed within a
reasonable time.
9. In view of the above, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality
in the order passed by the second respondent and the writ petition lacks merits
and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
03.01.2024
Internet: Yes
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Lpp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Chairman,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
No.800, Anna Salai
Chennai – 600 002.
2.The Chief Engineer,
North Chennai Thermal Power Project
Ennore, Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
4.The Tahsildar
Ponneri Taluk,
Ponneri
Thiruvallur District.
5.The Secretary to Department
Labour and Employment Department
Government of Tamil Nadu
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
6. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
Lpp
and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
03.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
