Disposed

Suradi Anirudh v. State of Telangana and 2 others

Telangana HC7 Oct 2025WP/20348/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought direction to authorities to consider the petitioner's application for conversion of his Maxi Cab from transport to non-transport personal vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act. Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents to consider the application on payment of requisite fee and communicate the decision within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to consider application dated 12.04.2022 for conversion from transport to non-transport personal vehicle per law, within four weeks; no costs.

Suradi Anirudh Vs State of Telangana and 2 others — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰² I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20348 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Suradi Anirudh, S/o. Late S. Ravinder Aged about 60 years, Occ. Pvt. employee, R/o. Ff.ltlo.20-3-184, Hussaini alam, Doodh bowli, Bhadurpura, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of by its Principal Secretary, Transport Roads and Buildings TRI Secretariat Buildings, BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad,

¶12

The Commissioner, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Transport Bhavan, 3 Authority Hyderabad, South Zone ...RESPONDENTS

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ Order or Direction especially one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the ac{ion of the Respondents in not considering the application submitted by the petitioner dt.12.O4.2O22 for conversion of the vehicle from Maxi Cab bearing No.AP 10 W 6752 from Transport to Nontransport personal vehicle as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act and Rules made there under and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the request of the petitioner for conversion of Maxi Cab bearing No. AP 10 W 6752 from Transport to Non-transport^personal vehicle in accordance with law.

¶14

IA NO: 1 OF 11022

¶15

Petitiorr under Section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High Court may be pleasedto} direct the respondents to^{direct the respondents to considerthe application} submitted by the^{petitionerdt.12.04.2o22and 09.11 .2021UnderSection 47 of M} V Act, 1988 lor conversion^{of the vehicle from MaxiCab bearing No. AP 10 W} 6752 from Tr;ansport^{to Non-transport personalvehicle, pending disposalof the} main Writ Petition.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRl. MOHD BILAL}

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents:^{GP FOR TRANSPORT}

¶18

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶19

¶20

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.2O348 of 2O22

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

¶24

¶25

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the action of the respond.ents in not considering the application submitted by the petitioner dated L2.O4.2O22 for conversion of the vehicle from Maxi Cab bearing No.AP 10 W 6752 from Transport to Non-Transport personal vehicle as illegal and arbitrary and requested to direct the respondents to dispose of the application made by the petitioner dated L2.O4.2O22.

¶26

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport submits that the respondent-authorities will follow the procedure as pbr law for disposing the application made by

¶27

¶28

SKrJ W.P.IIIo.2O348^{of 2022}

¶29

the peti.tioner^{dated L2.O4.2O22 by obtaining requisite fee for} conversion of^{vehicle from Transport toNon-Transport} personal vehicle in^{due course}

¶30

In view of the^{submissions made by both sides, the} writ petition^{is disposed of by directing the respondentsto} consider the^{applicationmade by the petitionerdated} t2.O4.t.O22 by^{obtaining requisitefee for conversionof} vehicle from^{Transportto Non-Transport personal vehicle as} per lavr and communicate^{the same to the petitioner within} four (4) weeks^{from the date of receiptof copy of this order'} There shall^{be no ord'er as to costs'}

¶31

S. ,\s a sequel, the^{miscellaneouspetitions pending, if}

¶32

any, shalt stand^closed.

¶33

P.C. SULEKHA^DEVI ,ffRUE SECTION OFFICER

1. 1. Hyderabad [OUT]

¶38

Two CD^Copies

B M/MP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0711012025

ORDER

( o3 THE sD
(J
5 rrg yn26

{,P

¶45

WP.No.20348 o12022

¶46

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶47

,(,

Suradi Anirudh v. State of Telangana and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suradi Anirudh v. State of Telangana and 2 others

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.Raja Bapu Vs the Dist.Collector,Nizamabad and 2 Others

Uppari Krishnaiah, Mahaboobnagar Dist Vs Jt Collector, Mahaboobnagar Dist and 9 Others

Mutyala Linganna, Nizamabad Dist and Anr. Vs Prl Secy, Revenue, Hyderabad and 3 Others

Mudavath Motilal, Hyderabad and 11 Others Vs Transport Commissioner, Hyderabad and 2 Others

Kedia Overseas Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Patancheru Sampath Kumar Vs The State of Telangana