Disposed

G.Durai v. The Transport Commissioner

Madras HC9 Mar 2016WP/8850/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In consolidated writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court of Judicature at Madras directed the Regional Transport Officer to receive and consider applications for Autorickshaw permits in Form CCPA within four weeks without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to receive and consider applications for Autorickshaw permits within four weeks.

G.Durai Vs The Transport Commissioner — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.03.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.Nos.8850 to 8859 of 2016

¶6

G. Durai .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8850 of 2016 M. Ambika .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8851 of 2016 M. Amuthavalli .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8852 of 2016 K. Lakshmi .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8853 of 2016 V.A.S. Prasad .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8854 of 2016 V. Murugan .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8855 of 2016 A. Balamurugan .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8856 of 2016 M. Govindaraj .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8857 of 2016 M. Azhagan .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8858 of 2016 M. Nagaraj .... Petitioner in W.P.No.8859 of 2016

¶7

Vs. ..1^st respondent in all the Writ Petitions .. 2^nd Respondent in WP Nos.8850 to 8853, 8857 and 8858 of 2016

¶8

The Transport Commissioner, State Transport Authority, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶9

The Regional Transport Officer, Ambattur

¶10

The Regional Transport Officer, Poonamallee

¶11

.. 2^nd respondent in WP No.8854, 8855, 8856 and 8859 of 2016

¶12

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writs of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to receive the applications of the petitioners dated 05.01.2016 in form CCPA with the prescribed fee for the grant of a Autorickshaw permit and to consider the same.

¶13

For Petitioners in all : Mr.M. Sathish Kumar the Writ Petitions For Respondents : Mr.T.N. Rajagopalan Spl.Govt. Pleader

¶14

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

¶15

COMMON ORDER

¶16

The petitioners have filed the above writ petitions to issue writs of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to receive the applications of the petitioners dated 05.01.2016 in form CCPA with the prescribed fee for the grant of a Autorickshaw permit and to consider the same.

¶17

Mr.T.N. Rajagopalan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents and submitted that the second respondent may be directed to consider the petitioners' applications in accordance with law.

¶18

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for by the petitioners, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the second respondent to receive the respective applications of the petitioners dated 05.01.2016 in Form CCPA and the prescribed fee for the grant of Autorickshaw permit and consider the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

With this observation, all the writ petitions are
disposed of. No costs.
sr Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1. The Transport Commissioner,
State Transport Authority,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005
2. The Regional Transport Officer,
Ambattur.
3. The Regional Transport Officer,
Poonamallee.
+ 10 CCS TO MR.M.SATHISH KUMAR, ADVOCATE SR 15176

¶20

KR/10/3/16

¶21

W.P.Nos.8850 to 8859 of 2016

¶22

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

G.Durai v. The Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Durai v. The Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Venkataraman, Vs The District Collector

M/s.Apm Terminals India Pvt. Vs Assistant Commissioner of

R.Kothandaram Vs Chief Commissioner of Income

Vice President-Excise Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

M.Johnpaul Vs The Regional Transport Officer

Tvl.Victus Dyeings, Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)