Disposed

Muthukumar v. the Regional Transport

Madras HC1 Nov 2018WP(MD)/22265/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court issued a common order in multiple writ petitions filed by owners of LMV Share Auto Rickshaws. The Court directed the Regional Transport Authority to receive applications for 5-seater Auto Rickshaw permits and pass appropriate orders on merits within eight weeks, without expressing any opinion on the merits itself.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent to receive applications and pass appropriate orders on merits within eight weeks.

Muthukumar Vs the Regional Transport — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

Muthukumar

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.11.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU W.P.(MD)Nos.22265 to 22271 of 2018

¶6

Muthukumar .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22265/18 Sivadeepan .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22266/18 Balamurugan .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22267/18 Kanagalingam .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22268/18 Vignesh .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22269/18 Senthilkumar .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22270/18 Dineshsiva .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.22271/18

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Regional Transport Authority, Thoothukudi.

¶9

.. Respondent in all WPs

¶10

COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of MANDAMUS, directing the respondent to accept the application dated 11.10.2018 of the petitioner and issue 5 Seater Auto Rickshaw permit (Share Auto) forthwith to the petitioner.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Narasimhan(In all WPs) For Respondent : Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, Government Advocate (In all WPs)

¶12

COMMON ORDER

¶13

Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the documents placed on record.

¶14

The petitioners herein are the owners of LMV Share Auto Rickshaw. They want permits to be issued by the respondent authority. In this regard, they have given application dated 11.10.2018. But, the applications were not entertained. Therefore, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions directing the respondent to receive the applications and to pass appropriate orders for grant of Share Auto Rickshaw permit.

¶15

Considering the nature of relief sought for, this Court, without adverting into the merits of the case, directs the respondent to receive the applications and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the

¶16

merits of the matter and it is open to the respondent to pass orders one way or the other.

¶17

These writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/-

¶18

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶20

¶21

The Regional Transport Authority, Thoothukudi.

¶22

+7cc to Mr.T.Narasimhan, Advocate Sr.No.94067 to 94073

¶23

¶24

VB/RSK/SAR2/26.11.2018/2P/9C

¶25

W.P.(MD)Nos.22265 to 22271 of 2018

¶26

01.11.2018

¶27

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

Muthukumar v. the Regional Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthukumar 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

Emc Limited, Rep. by Its Vs the Assistant Commissioner

A.Sailanathan, Vs the Commissioner of Customs

Tvl.Nylon Electric Store Vs the Assistant Commissioner(St)

K. Karuppasamy, Vs the Presiding Officer

M/S.Anbu Motors Vs the Principal Chief

M/S.Valli Textile Mills, Vs Joint Secretary to the