Disposed

R.Asaithambi v. The Transport Commissioner

Madras HC12 Jan 2016WP/1037/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of multiple writ petitions seeking mandamus under Article 226 to direct the Regional Transport Officer to receive autorickshaw permit applications and pass merit-based orders within four weeks without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to receive applications, consider them, and pass orders on merits for autorickshaw permit within four weeks.

R.Asaithambi Vs The Transport Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 12.01.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.1037 to 1041 of 2016

¶6

R.Asaithambi ... Petitioner in WP.1037/2016
K.Palani ... Petitioner in WP.1038/2016
P.Anbu ... Petitioner in WP.1039/2016
K.Shankar ... Petitioner in WP.1040/2016
S.Chockkammal ... Petitioner in WP.1041/2016
Vs
1. The Transport Commissioner,
State Transport Authority
Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
2. The Regional Transport Officer,
Chennai (North East),
Chennai. ... Respondents in all W.Ps.

¶7

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to receive the applications of the petitioners dated 03.11.2015, in Form CCPA and the prescribed fee for the grant of Autorickshaw Permits and to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶8

For petitioners : Mr.J.S. Arunkumar (in all Wps) For respondents : Mr.R.M.Muthukumar, GA (in all Wps)

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶11

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking the common relief of issuing a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Regional Transport Authority concerned to receive the respective application of the petitioners in Form CCPA and the prescribed fee for the grant of autorickshaw permit and to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

Mr.R.M.Muthukumar, learned Government Advocate takes
notice for the respondents.
3. Without going into the merits of the matters, these
writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respective
Regional Transport Officer concerned to receive the applications
of the petitioners, consider the same and pass appropriate
orders for grant of autorickshaw permit, on merits and in
accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rpa
To
1. The Transport Commissioner,
State Transport Authority
Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
2. The Regional Transport Officer,
Chennai (North East),
Chennai.
+ 5 ccs to Mr.J. S. Arunkumar, Advocate SR.2742, 2743, 2747 to
2749
+ 1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.2434
W.P.Nos.1037 to 1041 of 2016
PUR(CO)
EU 21.1.16

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Asaithambi v. The Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Asaithambi v. The Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.N.Radha Vs The Goverment of Tamil Nadu

Mantralaya Impex Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax

S.Dhanakodian, Vs The Registrar of the

M/s.Rose Traders, Vs The Commissioner of Customs

D.Ponnuswamy, Vs The Deputy Inspector General

M/s.Arul Exports & Imports, Vs The Commissioner of Customs-I