Disposed

L.Venkat Kumar, v. The District Collector

Madras HC1 Mar 2016WP/39847/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking recall of a bus and issue of duplicate permits, the High Court of Madras did not examine the merits. The Court directed the Regional Transport Officer to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2016 and pass orders on merits within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2016 and pass orders on merits within ten days. Petition disposed.

L.Venkat Kumar, Vs The District Collector — Specific Performance | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.03.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.39847 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶6

L.Venkat Kumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector/
Regional Transport Authority,
Thiruvarur District,
Thiruvarur.
2.The Regional Transport Officer,
Regional Transport Office,
Thiruvarur – 610 001.
3.The Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade – I,
Regional Transport Office,
Thiruvarur – 610 001.
4.R.Kavitha
5.K.Ravi ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of
India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call
for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order dated
03.12.2015 on the file of the respondent no.3 and quash the
same, consequently directing the respondents 2 & 3 to release
the petitioner's bus bearing Registration No.TN 25 H 5846 by
issuing duplicate copies of the R.C.Book and Stage Carriage
Permit to the petitioner within the time frame that may be
stipulated by this Court.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Thilageswaran

¶8

For Respondents: Mr.M.S.Ramesh,

¶9

Additional Government Pleader (R1 to R3)

¶10

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

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

Though the petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order dated 03.12.2015 on the file of the 3^rd respondent and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents 2 & 3 to release the petitioner's bus bearing Registration No.TN 25 H 5846 by issuing duplicate copies of the R.C.Book and Stage Carriage Permit to the petitioner within the time frame, at the time of arguing the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice to direct the 3^rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2016 in accordance with law.

¶13

2.Mr.M.S.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the 2^nd respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2016 in accordance with law.

¶14

3.Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2016 and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

4.With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶16

Sd/-

¶17

Assistant Registrar(CS II)

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

¶21

1.The District Collector/

¶22

Regional Transport Authority, Thiruvarur District, Thiruvarur.

¶23

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

¶24

2.The Regional Transport Officer, Regional Transport Office, Thiruvarur – 610 001.

¶25

3.The Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade – I, Regional Transport Office, Thiruvarur – 610 001.

¶26

+1cc to Mr.K.Thilageswaran, Advocate sr.13119

¶27

W.P.No.39847 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
ug(CO)
srg(02/03/2016)

¶28

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

L.Venkat Kumar, v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Venkat Kumar, v. The District Collector

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

K.Jagannathan Vs Devanandam

M/s.Labindia Instruments Pvt. Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

Thiru.S.Sakthivel, Vs The Appellate Deputy

S.Karthikeyan Vs The Regional Transport Officer

M/s.Sri Kanniamman Cotton Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

Tmt.v.Suganya Devi Vs the Asst. Commissioner of