G.Ponnusamy v. The Secretary to Government Electricity Department Government of Tamilnadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 21.4.2009CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRANWrit Petition No.30198 of 2008G.Ponnusamy .. Petitionervs. 1. The Secretary to Government Electricity Department Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George Chennai-600 0092. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board 800, Anna Salai Chennai-600 0023. The District Employment Officer District Employment Exchange Opp: Government Hospital Dharmapuri Pin 636 701.. RespondentsWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing therespondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner for the post ofHelper (Industrial Training Institute) (National Trade Certificate). For petitioner: Mr.S.Ayyathurai For respondent : Mr.M.Vaidynathan for R1 &R2 ` Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Government Advocate for R3O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ ofMandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider thepetitioner for the post of Helper (Industrial Training Institute)(National Trade Certificate). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The petitioner would contend that he had completed his plustwo in the year 1986 and has passed the examinations in March 1990.In the meanwhile, he has joined the Industrial Training Institute(National Trade Certificate) Wireman Trade in the GovernmentIndustrial Training Institute, Hosur and has passed in the year1991. The petitioner got his name registered with the thirdrespondent, namely, District Employment Officer, District EmploymentExchange, Dharmapuri, in June 1991 with the plus two and theIndustrial Training Institute (National Trade Certificate)qualifications. 3. It is further contended by the petitioner that he also didthe Company Apprenticeship Course and completed the same in December1993 and has also got the National Apprenticeship Certificate andthis fact was also registered by the third respondent. Apart fromthis, he did B.A. degree in History under Distance EducationProgramme in 2006 and also got Electrical 'C' Licence as early as inOctober 2007.4. The petitioner's main contention was that he had receivedonly two intimation letters in 1997 and 1999 and that he was notselected in 1997 and thereafter, in 1999 he got the interview callletter belatedly. Now, the Government has sought for I.T.I. helperfrom the I.T.I. Certificate Holders for about 2500 posts and thatthe National Apprenticeship Certificates Holders could be sponsoredupto the age of 41 years. But, unfortunately, the petitioner'sapplication has not been considered and therefore, he had sent anapplication on 13.12.2008 and as he was not sponsored by theemployment exchange, he could not participate. Hence, he has comeforward with the present writ petition.5. While admitting the writ petition in W.P.No.30198 of 2008,on 22.12.2008, this Court in M.P.No.1 & 2 of 2008 has directed therespondents to keep one post of 'Helper' vacant and ordered notice.Subsequently, pending the writ petition, the petitioner was calledfor an interview for the selection of the very same I.T.I. helperpost for the interview to be held on 25.2.2009 at about 9.00 a.m.But, the petitioner would contend that the said interview card wasreceived by him only at 12.00 noon on 25.2.2009 and consequently,the petitioner was unable to attend the interview at the prescribedtime. Therefore, the petitioner approached the ChiefEngineer/Personnel and on his advise, he went to meet the SeniorPersonnel Officer, but, as he was not available, the petitioner metthe Assistant Personnel Officer and brought to his notice about thelate delivery of the letter. In spite of the aforesaid facts beingbrought to the notice of the respondents, the petitioner was notinterviewed on that day and therefore, he has also sought forfurther direction from this Court. At this point of time, this Courton 4.3.2009, passed an order that as the order dated 22.12.2008 in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 in W.P.No.30198 of 2008, was still in force,which would safeguard the interest of the petitioner, no furtherorders are necessary and directed the respondents to file a counterand posted the case for enquiry. Though the case has been postedthereafter, the respondents did not file a counter. 6. At this point of time, the learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the first andsecond respondents as well as the learned Government Advocate forthe third respondent stated that the main writ petition could bedisposed of taking into consideration the subsequent event ofcalling for interview of the petitioner by the Department. Hence,the writ petition is taken up for final disposal by consent ofparties. 7. The learned counsels appearing for both the partiescategorically admitted one thing that the petitioner subsequent tothe filing of the writ petition has been called for an interview forselection to the post of Industrial Training Institute helper bythe Electricity Board on 25.2.2009 and unfortunately, the veryinterview card reached the petitioner only late in the evening. Eventhough he could reach the office on the same day, he was notinterviewed as the time fixed by them was in the morning. 8. From the perusal of the records and as per the arguments ofthe learned counsel appearing for the both sides, it is very clearthat the petitioner has got the requisite qualifications to applyand he could have been considered by the third respondent. The thirdrespondent has also rightly sent the interview card to thepetitioner to attend the interview on 25.2.2009. It is also admittedby the learned counsel appearing for the both the parties that stillthe posts are kept vacant pursuant to the direction of this Court inM.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2008 in W.P.No.30198 of 2008. As the petitionerfurther categorically pleads that he would complete the age of 41years on 15.6.2009 and unless the writ petition is disposed of witha direction to the authorities concerned to consider his candidaturefor the post, he would not be eligible for applying the posts.Therefore, taking into consideration of all the subsequent eventsand the fact that he would become age barred, this Court directs thesecond respondent to consider the petitioner for selection to thepost of I.T.I. helper in accordance with the rules and regulations,if he is eligible for such selection. The petitioner may be calledfor an interview, as he could not attend the interview on 25.2.2009and as he has been sponsored by the employment exchange and thelearned Government Advocate appearing for the third respondent, theDistrict Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange,Dharmapuri, has no objection for conducting an interview for theabove said post in respect of the petitioner by the secondrespondent. The second respondent is directed to consider the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner for selection to the posts of I.T.I. helpers and call foran interview and pass necessary orders on merits and in accordancewith law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of acopy of this order, if he is otherwise eligible for such selection.9. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposedof. Consequently, connected M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of2009 are closed. No costs. Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.Registrarlan To1. The Secretary to Government Electricity Department Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George Chennai-600 0092. The Chairman Tamil Nadu Electricity Board 800, Anna Salai Chennai-600 0023. The District Employment Officer District Employment Exchange Opp: Government Hospital Dharmapuri Pin 636 7011 cc to Mr.M. Vaidyanathan, Advocate, SR. 166961 cc to Mr.S. Ayyathurai, Advocate, SR. 16199W.P.No.30198 of 2008KJI (CO)kk 4/5