Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

G.Selvamoorthy vs the Chief Engineer/

G.Selvamoorthy vs The Chief Engineer/

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 27, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1428000

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/8100/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

G.Selvamoorthy

Respondent

The Chief Engineer/

Excerpt

.....petitioner challenged the suspension in w.p. no.19790 of 2017, which was disposed of with a direction to face disciplinary proceedings. a charge memo dated 31.08.2017 was then issued. the petitioner filed w.p. no.1704 of 2018 challenging reposting orders, and obtained a status quo order. despite producingpage2 of 7a fitness certificate, he was not permitted to rejoin, leading to cont.p. no.1720 of 2018. on 29.02.2019, the suspension was revoked and the petitioner rejoined duty on 22.02.2019. subsequently, on 02.12.2021, punishment of stoppage of increment for two years with cumulative effect was imposed. the petitioner preferred an appeal on 17.10.2022. on 17.10.2023, this court in w.p. no.6294 of 2021 directed consideration of his case for promotion. on 24.06.2025, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking settlement of arrears, which remains unconsidered. hence, the present writ petition has been filed.3.the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 within a reasonable time to be fixed by this court.4.considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.page3 of 7 5.with the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. no costs. 27-02-2026 index: yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no uma to page4 of 71. the chief engineer/personnel the tamil nadu general and distribution corporation ltd. (tangedco) 144, anna salai, chennai-600 002.2. the superintending engineer thiruvannamalai electricity, distribution circle tangedco, thiruvannamalai district-635 601.m.dhandapani,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No.8100 of 2026 G.Selvamoorthy ..Petitioner Vs

1. The Chief Engineer/Personnel The Tamil Nadu General and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO) 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer

Thiruvannamalai Electricity, Distribution Circle TANGEDCO, Thiruvannamalai District-635 601. ..Respondent(s) Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 st and 2nd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 and to settle the arrears of amount as mentioned in Table A + Table B (Rs.19,63,746/-) be settled along with refixed salary, refixed pension arrears and arrears of retirement benefits and promotion arrears.

For Petitioner: Mr.D.Rajagopal For Respondents: Mr.C.Manoharan Standing Counsel Page1 of 7

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 1 st and 2nd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 and to settle the arrears of amount as mentioned in Table A + Table B (Rs.19,63,746/-) be settled along with refixed salary, refixed pension arrears and arrears of retirement benefits and promotion arrears.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (now TANGEDCO) as a Helper and rose to the post of Foreman through promotion. On 02.11.2016, while serving as Foreman, a charge memo was issued for unauthorised absence. After enquiry, the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of withholding increment for one year with cumulative effect, which was confirmed in appeal. The petitioner’s challenge in W.P. No.5256 of 2020 was dismissed, but in W.A. No.718 of 2024, the Hon’ble Division Bench set aside the punishment. The petitioner retired on 30.06.2023. Meanwhile, on 15.07.2017, a memo for work irregularities was issued, followed by suspension on 24.07.2017 without enquiry. The petitioner challenged the suspension in W.P. No.19790 of 2017, which was disposed of with a direction to face disciplinary proceedings. A charge memo dated 31.08.2017 was then issued. The petitioner filed W.P. No.1704 of 2018 challenging reposting orders, and obtained a status quo order. Despite producing

Page2 of 7

a fitness certificate, he was not permitted to rejoin, leading to Cont.P. No.1720 of 2018. On 29.02.2019, the suspension was revoked and the petitioner rejoined duty on 22.02.2019. Subsequently, on 02.12.2021, punishment of stoppage of increment for two years with cumulative effect was imposed. The petitioner preferred an appeal on 17.10.2022. On 17.10.2023, this Court in W.P. No.6294 of 2021 directed consideration of his case for promotion. On 24.06.2025, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking settlement of arrears, which remains unconsidered. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.

4.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2 nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Page3 of 7 5.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 27-02-2026 Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No Uma To Page4 of 7

1. The Chief Engineer/Personnel The Tamil Nadu General and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO) 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer Thiruvannamalai Electricity, Distribution Circle TANGEDCO, Thiruvannamalai District-635 601.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

Uma Page5 of 7 27-02-2026 Page6 of 7 Page7 of 7

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial