S.Jothinathan Vs The Regional Transport authority

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner’s representation dated 26.01.2026 for taking in a stipulated time to be fixed by this Court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Padmanabhan For Respondents : Ms.Bakkiyalakshmi Government Advocate [R1] Notice dispensed with [R2]

¶15

¶16

Page No.1 of 6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.No.12268 of 2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1 st respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner’s representation dated 26.01.2026, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

2. Ms.Bakkiyalakshmi, learned Government Advocate, accepts

¶22

notice on behalf of the 1 st respondent. Since no adverse order is passed against the 2 nd respondent in this writ petition, notice to the 2 nd respondent is dispensed with by this Court.

¶23

3. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the 2nd respondent has encroached upon the petitioner’s route permit. The petitioner is having route permit issued by the 1 st respondent from Poomalur Water Tank to Tiruppur Old Bus Stand. According to the petitioner, the 2 nd respondent is having route permit from Veerapandipirivu to Valayapalayam. However, the 2 nd respondent is now operating buses at Tiruppur as well in violation of her route permit. The petitioner had given a representation on 26.01.2026 to the 1 st respondent requesting them to take action against the 2 nd respondent for violation of

¶24

Page No.2 of 6

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.No.12268 of 2026

¶27

the route permit. Since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶28

4. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents, if the petitioner’s representation as stated supra is considered on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the objections of the 2 nd respondent, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s representation.

¶29

5. For the foregoing reasons, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the 1 st respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner’s representation, dated 26.01.2026 requesting the 1 st respondent to take action against the 2 nd respondent in accordance with law for the alleged violation said to have been committed by the 2 nd respondent in the route permit by encroaching upon the petitioner’s route permit, after hearing the objections of the 2 nd respondent and after giving due consideration to the supporting documents produced by the respective parties, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording one

¶30

Page No.3 of 6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.No.12268 of 2026

¶33

personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the 2 nd respondent. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

27.03.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp

¶35

Page No.4 of 6