Allowed

Dr.K.Nararajan, v. The Regional Transport

Madras HC3 Jun 2016WP/7405/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of the writ petition challenging a rejection of a mini bus permit application by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal instead of approaching the Tribunal. The petitioner was granted 30 days to file the appeal without limitation constraints.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal within 30 days; writ petition disposed of.

Dr.K.Nararajan, Vs The Regional Transport — 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.7405 of 2016 and

¶6

W.M.P.No.6620 of 2016

¶7

Dr.K.Natarajan ... Petitioner Vs

¶8

The Regional Transport Authority, Erode District at Gobichettipalayam. ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the respondent in and by his proceedings No.R.No.22551/B4/2007 dated 21.01.2016 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to grant mini bus permit to the petitioner between Anthiyur Bus stand and Thoppapalayam, Erode District under the old scheme.

¶10

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Erode rejecting the petitioner's application dated 12.12.2006 for grant of new mini bus permit. Admittedly, the petitioner has an effective alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the said order before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.

¶11

2.Facing this situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submits that the petitioner may permit to approach the Tribunal.

¶12

3.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Taking into consideration the fact that the writ petition was pending before this Court from February 2016, the petitioner is granted 30 days time from the date of receipt of copy of this order to file an appeal before the State Transport Appellate

¶13

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

¶14

Tribunal and if such appeal is filed, the State Transport Appellate Tribunal shall consider the same without reference to limitation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)

¶16

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sgl
To
1.The Regional Transport Authority,
Erode District at Gobichettipalayam.
2.The State Transfort Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai.
+1cc to M/S.P.T RamaDevi, Advocate Sr.29745
+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.30201
W.P.No.7405 of 2016
ug[co]
srg 14/06/2016

¶17

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

Dr.K.Nararajan, v. The Regional Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.K.Nararajan, v. The Regional Transport

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.Natarajan Vs The Regional Transport Officer

S.Thirugnana Sambanda Moorthy Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Vs The Deputy Commissioner