Disposed

G.Anandaraj v. The Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC5 Apr 2019WP/10498/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed under Article 226 prayed for a direction to the Regional Transport Officer to consider and pass orders on an application for a Carriage Maxi Cab permit. The court directed the respondent to decide the matter within eight weeks without going into merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the application dated 06.03.2019 and pass orders within eight weeks.

G.Anandaraj Vs The Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.04.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.10498 of 2019

¶6

G.Anandaraj ... Petitioner Vs. The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai-South, Chennai. ... Respondent Prayer:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's application dated 06.03.2019 for the grant of Carriage Maxi Cab permit in respect of vehicle Number TN-07/BK-6197 forthwith.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Hariharan For Respondent : Mr.V.Shanmugasundar Special Government Pleader O R D E R

¶8

Mr.V.Shanmugasundar, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶9

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's application dated 06.03.2019 for the grant of Carriage Maxi Cab permit in respect of vehicle Number TN-07/BK6197 forthwith.

¶10

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

¶11

According to the petitioner, he made an application dated 06.03.2019 to the respondent for the grant of Carriage Maxi Cab permit in respect of vehicle Number TN-07/BK-6197. However, till date no order has been passed. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶12

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice, if a suitable direction is issued to the respondent to consider the application filed by the petitioner.

¶13

The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that if the application filed by the petitioner is pending before the respondent and the respondent will consider the appeal on merits and in accordance with law.

¶14

In the light of the submissions and also considering the limited scope of prayer sought for in this writ petition, this Court, without going into merits of the case, directs the respondent to consider the application filed by the petitioner dated 06.03.2019 and pass orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There is no order as to costs. -s/dAssistant Registrar(CS-IV) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar r n s To The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai-South, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.K.Hariharan, Advocate Sr.33279 +1cc to the Government Pleader sr.34350 W.P.No.10498 of 2019 cp[co] srg 10/04/2019

¶16

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

G.Anandaraj v. The Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Anandaraj 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

A.Tamizh selvan Vs Secretary

Dr.a.Susila Vs Chennai Metropolitan Development

T.Sundhara Lingam, Vs The Greater Chennai Corporation

Ved Pal Boora Vs the Director General

S.Jaffer Ali Vs The District Collector Cum Arbitrator

R.sambathu Vs Inspector of Police