(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. Though the matter was listed for considering the question of fixing an early date, keeping in view the urgency of the matter, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal on the consent of the learned counsel appearing for both parties.
(2.) The petitioner was working as a contract labour under the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. Subsequently the Board has taken a decision to abolish the contract labour system and to absorb the persons keeping in view certain norms prescribed by the Board. The petitioner's claim is that even though he is eligible for being considered for the appointment, his case has been ignored.
(3.) In the counter affidavit it is stated that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case under Sec. 304A of I.P.C., in as much as while driving a scooter, he has caused an accident causing death of an employee of the Board and in that view of the matter, the petitioner was not given the appointment.