Disposed

D. Maran v. The State Transport Authority

Madras HC25 Apr 2016WP/14157/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This thin common order in two writ petitions directs the State Transport Authority to consider the petitioner's applications dated 25.11.2015 for an All India Tourist Vehicle Permit and pass orders on merits within eight weeks, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider petitioner's applications dated 25.11.2015 for grant of All India Tourist Vehicle Permit and pass orders on merits within eight weeks from receipt of the order copy

D. Maran Vs The State Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 25.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.Nos.14157 and 14158 of 2016

¶6

D. Maran ..... Petitioner in both the writ petitions

¶7

¶8

The State Transport Authority, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005 .. Respondent in both the writ petitions

¶9

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue Writs of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's applications dated 25.11.2015 for the grant of All India Tourist Vehicle Permit (dealt with in R.Nos.56764/A1/2015 and 56765/A1/2015).

¶10

For petitioner : Mr.K. Hariharan

¶11

For respondent : Mr.A. Zakir Hussain Govt. Advocate

¶12

COMMON ORDER

¶13

The petitioner has filed the writ petitions for issuance of Writs of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's applications dated 25.11.2015 for the grant of All India Tourist Vehicle Permit (dealt with in R.Nos.56764/A1/2015 and 56765/A1/2015).

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had submitted the applications on 25.11.2015, but the respondent has not considered the same.

¶15

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

¶16

Mr.A. Zakir Hussain, learned Government Advocate, appaering for the respondent, submitted that the respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's applications and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

¶17

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking into consideration of the limited prayer sought for by the writ petitioner, without expressing any opinion with regard to the mertis of the case, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's applications dated 25.11.2015 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. . With these observations, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶18

sr Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
The State Transport Authority,
Chepauk,
Chennai-600 005
+ 2 cc to Mr.K. Hariharan, Advocate Sr 25501
+ 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, Sr 25843
KR/28/4/16
W.P.Nos.14157 & 14158 of 2016

¶19

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

D. Maran v. The State Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Maran v. The State Transport Authority

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

Mahalaxmi Inn Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Managing Director

M. Sumathy Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.Ravindran, Vs Secretary, Regional Transport

V.Palaniammal, Vs the Tamil Nadu Small

A.Velankanni Vs The District Collector

B.Jayakumar, Vs The Transport Commissioner