Disposed

R.Ganesan, v. The Regional Transport

Madras HC4 May 2018WP/11453/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Madras High Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application for replacing his stage carriage and transfer vehicle ownership, ordering the authority to pass orders on merits within four weeks without adjudicating the merits of the matter.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application for vehicle replacement and pass orders on merits within four weeks.

R.Ganesan, Vs The Regional Transport — Property and Title | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.05.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

W.P.No.11453 of 2018

R.Ganesan

.. Petitioner

The Regional Transport Authority Vellore.

¶10

The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority-cumThe Regional Transport Officer, Sathuvachari, Vellore.

¶11

Regional Transport Authority-cum-

¶12

The Regional Transport Officer,

¶13

.. Respondents

¶14

Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the application dated 02.04.2018 of the petitioner for the replacement of the existing stage carriage bearing Registration No.TN-23-AH-2626 plying on the route from Katpadi Railway Station to Melarasampattu having seating capacity 59 in all with the new vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-03-TF-2461 (BSIV Model) with seating capacity 57 in all, and to effect the transfer of ownership of vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-03TF-2461 to the name of the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶15

For petitioner : Mr.S.Govindraman

¶16

For respondents : Mr.R.Udhayakumar, Addl.G.P.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to consider the application dated 02.04.2018 of the petitioner for the replacement of the existing stage carriage bearing Registration No.TN-23-AH-2626 plying on the route from Katpadi Railway Station to Melarasampattu having seating capacity 59 in all with the new vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-03-TF-2461 (BSIV Model) with seating capacity 57 in all, and to effect the transfer of ownership of vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-03TF-2461 to the name of the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶19

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

¶20

According to the petitioner, he is having stage carriage permit from Katpadi Railway Station to Melarasampattu in respect of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-23-AH-2626 and since the said vehicle developed repair, he wants to replace it with the new vehicle bearing Registration No.AP-03-TF-2461. The petitioner has filed an application dated 02.04.2018 before the second respondent for replacement of the vehicle. So far, no orders have been passed on the said application, and hence, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

¶21

Considering the limited scope of the prayer made in the Writ Petition, without adverting on the merits of the matter, the second respondent is directed to consider the said application and pass suitable orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶22

With the above observations and direction, the Writ
Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Vacation officer
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
cs / pvs
To
1. The Regional Transport Authority
Vellore.
2. The Secretary,
Regional Transport Authority-cum-
The Regional Transport Officer,
Sathuvachari, Vellore.
+1cc to Mr.S.GOVINDARAMAN, Advocate, S.R.No. 33022
W.P.No.11453 of 2018
PVS(CO)
TR(08/05/2018)

¶23

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

R.Ganesan, v. The Regional Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Ganesan, 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

The Official Assignee Vs b.seethalakshmi

Dr.B.Seethalakshmi Vs the Official Assignee

Janani Subramanyan Vs Ramesh Lakshmi Ratan

V.L.Narendrakumar, Vs The Regional Transport

C.Raguraman, Vs The Secretary

M.Karthik Vs The Inspector of Police