Madras High Court
J.Ganesan vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 5 January, 2026
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.Nos.594 and 622 of 2016, 235, 267, 744 of 2017,
W.P.Nos.12525, 17705, 30067 and 30068 of 2016,
12154 and 13035 of 2019 and
C.M.P.Nos.8169, 7867 of 2016, 3817, 4164, 4165,
10264 of 2017, 23493 of 2018, 2825 of 2019,
W.M.P.Nos.10839, 15407, 26053, 26054 of 2016 and 13166 of 2019
W.A.No.594 of 2016
1. J.Ganesan
2. K.Gowrisankar
3. R.Manikandan
4. M.Premkumar
5. G.Thameem Khan
6. M.Abishek
7. M.Santhosh
8. S.Surendran
9. N.Sakthivel
10. Balamurugan ... Petitioners/Appellants
-vs-
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Labour and Employment (T2)
Fort St.George, Madras-600 009.
2. The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited,
Rep. by the Chief Engineer (Personnel), NPKKRR Maligai,
144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2 ... Respondents/Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside
the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.12361 of 2016 dated
04.04.2016.
Appearance:
Case No. Appellants/Petitioners Respondents
W.A.Nos.594/2016, Mr.A.G.Vedavikas For R1 – Mr.R.Kumaravel
235/2017 for Mrs.V.Srimathi Addl. Govt. Pleader
For R2 – Mr.R.Nikkhilesh
Athav for Mr.K.Rajkumar
W.A.622 of 2016 Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar For R1 – Mr.R.Kumaravel
Addl. Govt. Pleader
For R2 – Mr.R.Nikkhilesh
Athav for Mr.K.Rajkumar
W.A.267 of 2017 Mr.K.M.Ramesh, SeniorFor R1 & R2 –
Counsel, for Mr.S.Apunu Mr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mr.K.Rajkumar.
For R4 & R5 –
Mr.M.Mahamani
W.A.744 of 2017 No Appearance For R1 – Mr.R.Kumaravel
Addl. Govt. Pleader
For R2 – Mr.R.Nikkhilesh
Athav for Mr.K.Rajkumar
For R8 to 73 – Mr.N.Ponraj
For R4,5,7 – No
Appearance
For R3 & R6 - Givenup
W.P.12525 of 2016 Mr.K.M.Ramesh, SeniorFor R1 & R2 –
Counsel, forMr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mrs.R,Sandhya Mr.K.Rajkumar.
W.P.17705 of 2016 Mr.K.M.Ramesh, SeniorFor R1 & R2 –
Counsel, forMr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mr.K.Bharathi Mr.K.Rajkumar
For R3 – No Appearance
W.Ps.30067 & Mr.K.M.Ramesh, SeniorFor R1 & R2 –
30068 of 2016, Counsel, forMr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mr.K.Vijayakumar Mr.K.Rajkumar
For R3 – No Appearance
2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
W.P.12154 of 2019 Mr.A.Arshad Khan, forMr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mr.S.Prasanna Mr.K.Rajkumar
W.P.13035 of 2019 Mr.A.Arshad Khan, forMr.R.Nikkhilesh Athav for
Mr.S.Prasanna Mr.K.Rajkumar
*****
COMMONJUDGMENT
(By S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,)
The present Intra Court appeals have been instituted,
challenging the orders passed in the Writ Petitions. Writ Petitions have
been instituted, challenging the recruitment notification issued by the Tamil
Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO) for
selection and appointment to various posts of Technical Assistant /
Electrical, Technical Assistant / Mechanical, Assistant Draughtsman and
Field Assistant Trainee.
2. The contentions of the appellants / petitioners are that they
are Apprentices, undergone apprenticeship training under The Apprentices
Act, 1961 with the TANGEDCO. Therefore, they must be provided priority
in the matter of regular selection and appointment in TANGEDCO. It is
contended that a separate scheme has been framed for the purpose of
providing priority to Apprentices, who have undergone training under the
Act, 1961 in the TANGEDCO.
3/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
3. Writ Petitions have been filed, challenging the policy
decision of the TANGEDCO Board dated 31.08.2017, granting priority in
recruitment in favour of Apprentices. The object of the Act, 1961 is to
impart training to eligible candidates, enabling them to secure appointment
in various establishments. Therefore, undergoing training under the Act,
1961 per se would not confer any right to claim appointment in the Regular
Establishment. All appointments are to be made in accordance with the
Service Rules / Standing Orders or Regulations as applicable to the
particular Establishment.
4. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation
Limited is a State owned organization. Service Rules applicable for
recruitment are very much in force. Thus, selection and appointment is to
be undertaken strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules.
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for TANGENCO
furnished a copy of the Board Proceedings dated 31.08.2017, in which a
decision has been taken by the Board to provide priority to an extent if the
Open Market candidates and Apprentices stand in the equal footing.
Paragraph No.5 of the said Board Proceedings reads as under:
4/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
“5) Hence, the matter has been placed before the Board
of TANGEDCO and Board after careful consideration has
decided that the Apprentice Trained in the TNEB /
TANGEDCO / TANTRANSCO will have to appear in the
examination conducted by TNEB and also decided the following
exclusive policy with regard to apprentice is framed under the
section 22 (1) of the Apprentice Act, 1961 and direction of the
Hon’ble High Court of Madras.
(1) All apprentices who have undergone training in the Board
have to go through the process of selection provided in the
Regulations. Pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 11.03.2015, the
Board has decided to conduct written examination for all
categories of candidates. Therefore, the apprentice candidates
must also appear in the competitive written examination.
(2) Other things being equal, apprentice will be given preference
in appointment as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in U.P.State Road Transport
Corporation vs. U.P.Parivahan Nigam Shishukha (1995) 2 SCC
1 and clarified in U.P.Rajya Vidyut Parishad Apprentice Welfare
Assocation and Anr. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others 2000
LLR 869 (SC) = 2000 (3) SCR 1201, as has been followed
hitherto followed.
(3) Age relaxation will be allowed to the extent of the actual
period of apprentice training undergone in the TNEB /
TANGEDCO / TANTRANSCO.”
6. The above priority given by the Board itself is a concession
extended in favour of the Apprentices. Therefore, the Apprentices are not
entitled for any further concession or the relief from the hands of this
Court.
5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )
W.A.Nos.594 of 2016, etc., batch
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
ar With these observations, all the Writ Appeals and Writ Petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(S.M.S,J.,) (C.K,J.,)
05.01.2026
Index: Yes
Internet: Yes
ar
To:
1. The Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu, Labour and Employment (T2) Fort St.George, Madras-600 009.
2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, NPKKRR Maligai, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-2 W.A.Nos.594 and 622 of 2016, 235, 267, 744 of 2017, W.P.Nos.12525, 17705, 30067 and 30068 of 2016, 12154 and 13035 of 2019 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/01/2026 01:09:10 pm )