Madras High Court
WP/19651/2008 of P.RAMASUNDARAM Vs TAMILNADU ELECTRICITY BOARD on 26 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP No. 19651 of 2008
CNR: {HCMA010147042008}
and MP Nos.1 to 3 of 2008
P.Ramasundaram
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Rep. by its Chairman,
Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai-2.
2. The Chief Engineer/Personnel,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai,
Chennai-2.
3. The Superintending Engineer,
Mettur Workshop Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Mettur Dam-1.
4. P.Kannan
5. S.Selvakumar
6. K.B.Ravishankar
7. T.Selvaraj
8. K.Viswanathan
Chief Engineer/Distribution,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Trichy.
9. N.Kesavan
10.P.Muralidharan
11.A.Ziaullah
12.K.Rasappa
13.R.Jayaraman
14.P.Easwaramoorthy
15.T.Vasudevan
16.R.Balakrishnan
17.B.Allaudheen
18.C.Ponnuswamy
19.K.Thangarajan
20.S.I.Ahamed
21.N.Gunasekaran
22.A.Gopal
23.T.Mariappan
24.S.Kejapal
25.S.Rathinavel
26.A.Nedunchezhiyan
27.N.Krishnamoorthy
28.A.Ilango
(R9 to R28 impleaded vide order dated
13.02.2023 made in MP.No.1/2009 in
WP.No.19651/2008 by JSNPJ)
29.TNEB Engineers Sangam,
Represented by its General Secretary,
Mr.V.S.Sampathkumar,
New No.144, Old No.793, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600002.
30.K.Arunachalam,
(R29 & R30 impleaded vide order dated
13.02.2023 made in WMP.No.15799/2022 in
WP.No.19651/2008 by JSNPJ)
31.K.Jayachandran
(R31 impleaded vide order dated 26.10.2026
made in WMP.No3853/2024 in
WP.No.19651/2008 by KGRJ)
..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 from the second respondent bearing Memo No.075707/368/G1/G12/2008-1 dt: 31.07.2008 by which respondents 4 to 7
were selected and included in the panel for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer/Mechanical I Grade as illegal, contrary to the Memorandum of Understanding dt: 11.06.1996, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 2 to promote the petitioner in terms of the Memorandum of
Understanding by restoring the position of the petitioner in the common seniority list.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
For Respondent(s):
Mr.K.Rajkumar, (for R1 to R3)
Standing Counsel (TANGEDCO)
Ms.M.Meenatchi (for R4)
Mr.A.Manish Kumar (for R5 & R7)
Mr.V.Govardhanan (for R9 to R28)
Mr.Sundar Narayan (for R29 & R30)
Ms.S.Sadhana (for R31)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The prayer in the present writ petition is to call for the records relating to the impugned Memo dated 31.07.2008 issued by the second respondent, by which respondents 4 to 7 were selected and included in the panel for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer/Mechanical Grade I, to quash the same as illegal and contrary to the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 11.06.1996, and consequently, to direct respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioner in terms of the said MoU by restoring the petitioner's position in the common seniority list.
2. The petitioner claims promotion strictly in accordance with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 11.06.1996. It is the core contention of the petitioner that the private respondents were promoted in utter violation of the binding clauses of the said MoU.
3. Conversely, the counsel appearing for the official respondents argued that there is no violation of the MoU while drawing up the promotion panel. It was submitted that the promotions granted to the private respondents were in accordance with the rules, requiring no interference from this Court, and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition.
4. Heard both sides.
5. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.4719 of 2007 dated 30.03.2026. In the said order, this Court considered the scope and application of the very same MoU dated 11.06.1996.
6. Although the earlier writ petition (W.P.No.4719 of 2007) dealt with Grade II employees, and the present writ petition pertains to Grade I employees, the foundational matrix remains identical, as the parties in both cases place reliance upon the exact same underlying MoU dated 11.06.1996. The interpretations and legal principles settled by this Court in the earlier order regarding the binding nature of the MoU apply with equal force to the facts of the present case.
7. In view of the above findings, this writ petition stands allowed. The impugned Memo dated 31.07.2008 issued by the second respondent is hereby set aside to the extent that it denies the rightful seniority and promotional placement to the petitioner on the basis of the common seniority list. Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of Junior Engineer/Mechanical Grade I by restoring his position in the common seniority list in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 11.06.1996, including the consequential benefits that the petitioner may be entitled. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. 26-10-2026 Index: Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No Sni To
1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.
2. The Chief Engineer/Personnel, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Old No.800, New No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2.
3. The Superintending Engineer, Mettur Workshop Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mettur Dam-1.
KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J. Sni WP No. 19651 of 2008 26-10-2026