- (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus pursuant to the rejection of the claim of the writ petitioner for employment in the North Madras Thermal Power Project.
(2.) LANDS in Vallur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District were acquired for the purpose of constructing Housing Quarters and for laying of road for the employees of North Madras Thermal Power Project. For the purpose of smooth, speedy and successful acquisition, a public statement was made by the Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (first respondent), offering employment assistance to one member of each family from whom lands were acquired for the North Madras Thermal Power Project. The same was given effect to by issuing G.O.Ms.No.656, Labour and Employment, dated 29.06.1978. An extent of 0.93 acres belonging to one Subramani, S/o.Ganesan of Pattamandiri Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District comprised in S.No.797 of Vallur Village was also acquired for the said purpose. The said Subramani was the grandfather of the writ petitioner. Subramani died on 08.05.2000 leaving his son Rajendiran (father of the petitioner) as his sole legal heir. The petitioner, being the son of Rajendiran and grandson of Subramani, applied for employment under the Scheme on the ground that he is a member of the family from which the property was acquired. The report of the Tahsildar dated 11.01.2007 also included the name of the petitioner as one of the persons entitled to get employment under G.O.Ms.No.656, Labour and Employment, dated 29.06.1978. However, the Chief Executive Engineer, North Madras Thermal Power Project (second respondent) rejected the application of the petitioner by his proceedings foj/vz;/j/bgh-tbr mkpep-nk/gh/bgh-f/g-cbrbgh-,epbgh-nfh/ntiytha;g;g[-vz;/ 1101/07 dated 20.08.2007 on the ground that the petitioner was not the direct legal heir of Late. Subramani from whom the property was acquired. Aggrieved by and challenging the same the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
(3.) THE arguments advanced by Mr.Kamalesh Kannan, learned counsel for the petitioner, by Mr.R.Varalakshmi, learned standing counsel for the first respondent and by Mr.M.S.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader representing respondents 3 to 5 were heard. The materials placed before the Court were also perused.;