Dismissed

Thoothukudi Share Auto Owners Association v. the Regional Transport Authority

Madras HC16 Sept 2021WP(MD)/16674/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a writ petition seeking mandamus against transport authority for ignoring previous court observations. The petitioner's counsel requested withdrawal of the petition on the grounds that aggrieved individuals can institute independent suits. The court recorded the submission and disposed of the matter accordingly.

What the court decided

AI extract

Thoothukudi Share Auto Owners Association Vs the… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.16674 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.09.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.16674 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)No.13545 of 2021

¶7

M/s.Thoothukudi Share Auto Owners Association, Rep. by its Secretary, Mareeswaran ...Petitioner

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

The Regional Transport Authority, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi.

¶10

The Secretary to Regional Authority, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi.

¶11

Mahalakshmi ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to take actions against the violators (i.e., fresh permits granted as per the proceedings of 1^st respondent in R.No.13696/B3/2016, dated 09.03.2019) in the light of the Court observations made in WP(MD)No.8050 and 8051 of 2019 dated 25.02.2021, forthwith petitioner's representation dated 09.08.2021.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Padmanabhan For R1 and R2 : Mr.D.Ghandiraj Government Advocate

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

Prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to take actions against the violators (I.e., fresh permits granted as per the proceedings of the first respondent in R.No.13696/B3/2016 dated 09.03.2019) in the light of the Court observations made in WP(MD)No.8050 and 8051 of 2019, dated 25.02.2021, forthwith petitioner's representationdated 09.08.2021. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

W.P(MD)No.16674 of 2021

¶18

2. Mr.D.Ghandiraj, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the first and second respondents.

¶19

3. Mr.T.Padmanabhan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, after some arguments has submitted that, instead of filing this writ petition by the petitioner Association, the aggrieved individual can independently set the law in motion by filing appropriate adversary writ petition. With that liberty, he wants to withdraw this writ petition.

¶20

4 .Recording the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, with that liberty, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar (W)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

PNM/PJL

¶26

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.

¶27

¶28

The Regional Transport Authority, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi.

¶29

The Secretary to Regional Authority, Office of the District Collector, Thoothukudi.

¶30

+1 CC to M/s.SPL. GP ( SR-29437[F] dated 17/09/2021 )

¶31

+1 CC to M/s.T.PADMANABHAN, Advocate ( SR-29278[F] dated 16/09/2021 )

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.16674 of 2021 16.09.2021

¶33

PS(CO)

¶34

KB(27.09.2021) 2P 5C

¶35

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

¶36

2/2

Thoothukudi Share Auto Owners Association v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Thoothukudi Share Auto Owners Association v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Susee Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State Tax Officer

Ajay Kumar.R Vs the District Collector

M/S.Texport Industries Pvt.Ltd Vs Join Secretary to the

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs Tvl. T.K.Srinivasan and Co.

Palanivel Vs the District Manager

Nagalinga Nadar.M.M Vs the Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner