M. Surendar vs The Chairman And Managing ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3000 Tel

                                      1




         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                    WRIT PETITION No.11211 of 2021
ORDER:

This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage

with the consent of both parties.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"......to issue a Writ, order or orders direction or directions more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring action of the Respondents in not giving benefits on par with the Junior Linemen who were appointed in the year 2007 and direct the Respondents to give all the benefits to the Petitioners on par with the Junior Lineman who were appointed in the year 2007 as per Condition No 6 (iv) (C) of the revised notification dated 20/10/2006 and as per the Judgment in W.A.No.1434 of 2008 and batch 10/11/2009 and SLP No.15001-14110 of 2013 dated 25/02/2019 by considering Petitioners' representations dated 14/10/2020 15/10/20 21/10/2020 and 19/11/2020 and issue as CJLMs .....".

Heard Sri P.Giri Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners and Sri G.Vidya Sagar, learned Senior counsel appearing

for the respondents.

It has been contended by the petitioners that they are

working as contract labours since 1998 and the respondents have

issued respective notifications on 08.06.2006 by notifying the

number of posts available in the respective districts of their

respective operation circles. Pursuant to the said notification, they

have applied and participated in the selection process and they

have secured good merit and they are successful in the pole

climbing test. However, the respondents have not appointed them

on the ground that some of the aged persons were appointed.

Subsequently, their cases were considered pursuant to the

undertaking given by the respondents before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in Civil Appeal Nos.2049-2158 of 2019 dated 25.02.2019.

The grievance of the petitioners is that though were

appointed on 22.02.2020 pursuant to the undertaking given by the

respondents, they must be given the benefits and seniority from the

date of notification i.e., from 2006. When the respondents are not

considering their cases, they have submitted a detailed

representation to the respondents on 19.11.2020. But, so far, the

respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation.

Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had

contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition

directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted

by the petitioners on 19.11.2020 and pass appropriate orders in

accordance with law.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents had

contended that since the petitioners' representation is pending with

the respondents, the respondents would consider the same and

pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by

the parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be

disposed of directing the respondents to consider the

representation submitted by the petitioners on 19.11.2020 and pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a reasonable

period of time, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to state that the

petitioners are permitted to submit individual representations to the

respondents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt

of a copy of this order.

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 26.10.2021 Prv