M.Arockiam v. The Management of State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With these directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The petitioner is residing at Thiruchuli, Virudhungar district and in fact, he underwent surgery in the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai. Hence, it is unnecessary to refer the petitioner to Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital, Chennai. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to refer the…
Judgment
W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED :02.04.2026CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHYW.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026M.Arockiam ... PetitionerVs1. The Management of State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,Rep. by its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd. Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
The Branch Manager, State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,Tuticorin Branch, Ettayapuram Road, Tuticorin - 628 002.
The Senior Deputy Manager (HRD), State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026 Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002. ... RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to refer the petitioner to the medical board of Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, where he underwent surgery to ascertain his physical fitness to work as Driver as well as in the post of Conductor in the long distance Buses of the 1st respondent and to provide him suitable alternative light work depending upon his health condition, with pay protection, continuity of service and back wages payable from 09.07.2025 to 20.08.2025, 21.07.2025 to 06.02.2026 and from 17.03.2026 to till the date of providing the petitioner light duty. For Petitioner: Mr.A.Rahul For Respondents: Mr.K.Senthil Kumar Standing Counsel
O R D E RThe present writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to refer the petitioner to the medical board of Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, where he underwent surgery to ascertain his physical fitness to work as Driver as well as in the post of Conductor in the long distance Buses of the first respondent and to provide him suitable alternative light work depending upon his health condition, with 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026pay protection, continuity of service and back wages payable from 09.07.2025 to 20.08.2025, 21.07.2025 to 06.02.2026 and from 17.03.2026 to till the date of providing light duty to the petitioner.2. The petitioner was working as Driver-cum-Conductor in the respondents Corporation and he was made permanent on 26.06.2018. However, in April 2018, the petitioner sustained three stab injuries in his abdomen and below his left shoulder, due to which he underwent a surgery called’ laparotomy’, which is a surgical procedure in which a large incision is made in his belly for treating internal injuries/stab wounds and further, he underwent ‘jejuno ascending anastomosis’, which is a procedure where bypasses or reconnects the intestine by directly joining the small intestine with large intestine and this procedure was done because of severe intestinal injury, namely, stab wounds.3. Now the petitioner relying on the discharge summary, where it has been stated that the petitioner underwent surgery seeking alternative employment. The petitioner is, in fact, ready and willing to appear before the Medical Board. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 20264. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner may be referred to Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital, Chennai and the first respondent is the appropriate authority to consider the same.
Operative part
The petitioner is residing at Thiruchuli, Virudhungar district and in fact, he underwent surgery in the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai. Hence, it is unnecessary to refer the petitioner to Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital, Chennai. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to refer the petitioner to the Medical Board attached to the Virudhunagar Medical College Hospital, Virudhunagar, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.6. The Medical Board, Virudhunagar Medical College Hospital, Virudhunagar is directed to issue certificate/report within four weeks from the date of appearance of the petitioner. The first respondent shall consider the report issued by the Medical Board for granting alternative employment to the petitioner. The other issues raised in this writ petition also left open for the petitioner to agitate the same in the manner known 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026to law.7. With these directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.NCS : Yes/No 02.04.2026Index : Yes / NoInternet : Yes / Noapd Note: Issue on 07.04.2026To1. The Management of State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,Rep. by its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.2. The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd. Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.3. The Branch Manager, State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,Tuticorin Branch, Ettayapuram Road, Tuticorin - 628 002.4. The Senior Deputy Manager (HRD), State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd.,Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No. 8941 of 2026S.SRIMATHY.,J.apdORDER MADE INW.P(MD)No. 8941 of 202602.04.20266/6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With these directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.