Disposed

Dr.K.Natarajan v. The Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC3 Jun 2016WP/6903/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition regarding an unconsidered application for a mini bus stage carriage permit. Directing the Regional Transport Authority to consider the application and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file an appropriate application before the Regional Transport Authority, which must consider it and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

Dr.K.Natarajan Vs The Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.06.2016

¶3

C O R A M

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.6903 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.6123 of 2016

¶6

Dr.K.Natarajan ... Petitioner Vs The Regional Transport Officer, Gobichettipalayam, Erode District. ... Respondent

¶7

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 21.12.2015 for grant of mini bus stage carriage permit between Anthiyur Bus Stand and Athani, Erode District.

¶8

For petitioner ... Mr.A.Sundaravadhanan For respondent ... Mr.A.Zakkir Hussain Government Advocate ORDER

¶9

The petitioner had applied for grant of mini bus permit for the road Anthiyur Bus Stand to Athani in Erode District on 22.12.2006. Since the application had not been considered, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶10

2.The respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that a new scheme has been come into force and applications would be called for. However, the new scheme was introduced in 2011 and it is not known as to why for the last more than five years nothing has happened. In any event, the petitioner is entitled to know the fate of his application. Though in this writ petition only the Regional Transport Officer has been made as a party, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that an application has been enclosed along with the representation which will be forwarded to the Regional Transport Authority. But, however that is not quite evident from the documents annexed in the typed set.

¶11

3.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application before

¶12

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

¶13

the concerned Regional Transport Authority along with the copy of this order and if the same is filed, the authority shall consider the application and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the application. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶14

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sgl
To
The Regional Transport Officer,
Gobichettipalayam,
Erode District.
+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.30147
+ 1 cc to Mr.P.T.Ramadevi, Advocate SR NO 29744[15/6/16]
W.P.No.6903 of 2016
ug[co]
srg 14/06/2016

¶15

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

Dr.K.Natarajan v. The Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.K.Natarajan 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

M.Sampasivam, Vs The State Rep.by its

M.Elangovan Vs The Additional Commissioner

M/s.The Childrens Garden Vs The Commissioner

Dr.K.Nararajan, Vs The Regional Transport

S.Thirugnana Sambanda Moorthy Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Vs The Deputy Commissioner