Disposed

B.Vijayan, S/o.Balayayam, v. The Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC11 Apr 2017WP/8622/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought mandamus directing the respondent to accept his Maxi Cab permit application. The court discharged without costs, directing the respondent to receive the application and dispose of it on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the respondent to receive the application from the petitioner and decide it on merits within eight weeks. No costs.

B.Vijayan, S/o.Balayayam, Vs The Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.04.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶6

W.P. No. 8622 0f 2017

B. Vijayan

...Petitioner

Versus

The Regional Transport Officer Poonamallee, Chennai - 56 ...Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying

¶12

for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of a writ directing the Respondent herein to receive

¶13

the Application Form CCPA dated 16.03.2017 with prescribed fees and grant the

¶14

Maxi Cab Permit in respect of the Vehicle TN-04-AF-1752 forthwith.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr. A. Ganesan For Respondent : Mr. M. Elumalai Government Advocate.

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondent to receive the Application Form CCPA dated 16.03.2017 with prescribed fees and grant the Maxi Cab Permit in respect of the vehicle bearing Reg.No. TN-04-AF1752 forthwith.

¶19

Mr.M.Elumalai, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent.

¶20

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent is not even receiving the application form for grant of Maxi Cab permit. Needless to say that it is for the respondent to consider and decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled to such permit or not and therefore, this Court, at this stage, is not expressing any view on the claim made by the petitioner. However, as it is stated that the respondent is not even receiving the application, the writ petition is disposed of only with a direction to the respondent to receive the application from the petitioner and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶21

order. No costs.

¶22

11.04.2017

¶23

Speaking/Non-speaking order Index:Yes/No vsi

¶24

¶25

¶26

The Regional Transport Officer Poonamallee, Chennai - 56

¶27

¶28

K. RAVICHANDRABAABU, J.

vsi

W.P.No. 8622 of 2017

11.04.2016

http://www.judis.nic.in

B.Vijayan, S/o.Balayayam, v. The Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Vijayan, S/o.Balayayam, 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/s. Avalon cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. Vs The commissioner of customs

M/s.Softech Infinium Solutions Vs The Principal Commissioner

Ashok Leyland Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner

M/s.Texpert Vs The Commissioner of Customs

V.G.N.Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs The Assistant Commissioner

S.Udhayakumar Vs The Secretary