Allowed

R.Vijayakumar v. The Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC7 Jan 2016WP/443/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of multiple writ petitions filed by individuals seeking authorization for autorickshaw permits. The Court directed the respective Regional Transport Officers to receive the applications in Form CCPA, consider them on merits in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus to direct the Regional Transport Officer to receive the applications, consider them, and pass orders within four weeks.

R.Vijayakumar Vs The Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.01.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.443 to 450 of 2016

¶6

R.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner in WP.443/2016 R.Sivasankar ... Petitioner in WP.444/2016 G.Sivakumar ... Petitioner in WP.445/2016 G.Chinna Muthu ... Petitioner in WP.446/2016 D.Raja ... Petitioner in WP.447/2016 R.Pachaiyappan ... Petitioner in WP.448/2016 C.Anand Babu ... Petitioner in WP.449/2016 S.Ram Kumar ... Petitioner in WP.450/2016 Vs The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai Central, Chennai – 600 023. ... Respondent in WP.443/2016 The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai North West, Chennai – 600 049. ... Respondent in WP.444 and 445/2016 The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai North, Chennai – 600 099. ... Respondent in WP.446/2016 The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South East, Chennai – 600 028. ... Respondent in WP.447/2016 The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South, Chennai – 600 041. ... Respondent in WP.448/2016

¶7

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

¶8

The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai West, Chennai – 600 078.

¶9

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent herein to receive the application of the petitioners dated 18.11.2015, 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.

¶10

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.

¶11

Mr.A.Rajaperumal, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respective respondent.

¶12

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.

¶13

//True Copy//

¶14

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

¶15

¶16

1.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai Central, Chennai – 600 023. 2.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai North West, Chennai – 600 049. 3.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai North, Chennai – 600 099. 4.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South East, Chennai – 600 028. 5.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South, Chennai – 600 041. 6.The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai West, Chennai – 600 078. +8cc to Mr.K.Hariharan, Advocate, S.R.No.1319 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.1407 W.P.Nos.443 to 450 of 2016 mg(CO) srg(20/01/2016)

¶17

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

R.Vijayakumar v. The Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vijayakumar v. The Regional Transport Officer

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

N.Velu Vs The Regional Transport Officer

V.Kumar Vs The Regional Transport Officer

S.P.Annamalai Vs The State Transport Authority

S.Balavignesh Vs The Motor Vehicles Inspector

S.v.Ramaswami Vs The Commissioner

M/s.Maxcell Distributors, Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)