Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Puthanatham Post vs The Commissioner Of Transport on 21 February, 2017

Bench: A.Selvam, P.Kalaiyarasan

        

 

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 21.02.2017  

CORAM   

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM           
and 
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN             

W.P(MD)No.2919 of 2017   

Abdullah,
President,
Integrated Manapparai Taluk Manavarai and 
Iravai Pasanatharkal Farmer Association,
Register No.198 of 2013, 1222, East Street,
Puthanatham Post, Manapparai Taluk,  
Trichy District.                                        ..  Petitioner


Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Transport, 
   Chepauk, Chennai ? 600 005. 

2.The District Collector,
   Trichy District, Trichy.

3.The Deputy Transport Commissioner,  
   Pirattaiyur, Ramji Nagar, Trichy ? 9.

4.The Secretary,
   The Regional Transport Authority (West),
   Regional Transport Office, Trichy.

5.The Secretary,
   The Regional Transport Authority,
   Regional Transport Office, Dindigul.         .. Respondents 

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents
herein to ensure the stage carriage moffussil buses bearing Registration
No.TN-45-AP-2031, TN-45-AM-4334, TN-45-BV-7548, TN-57-AC-5225 are operated as     
per permit by considering the petitioner's representations dated 29.07.2016
and 02.01.2017. 

!For Petitioner                 : Mr.A.Joel Paul Antony

For Respondents         : Mr.D.Muruganantham          
                                  Additional Government Pleader

                
:ORDER  

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondents 4 and 5 to consider the representations dated 29.07.2016 and 02.01.2017 alleged to have been made by the petitioner in respect of the bus routes mentioned in the petition, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus.

2.Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, has taken notice for the respondents.

3.It is seen from the records that the petitioner has given two representations dated 29.07.2016 and 02.01.2017.

4.Considering the aforesaid factual aspects, this Court is inclined to pass the following order.

5.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the respondents 4 and 5 are strictly directed to consider the representations dated 29.07.2016 and 02.01.2017 and dispose of the same within a period of fifteen days.

To

1.The Commissioner of Transport, Chepauk, Chennai ? 600 005.

2.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy.

3.The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Pirattaiyur, Ramji Nagar, Trichy ? 9.

4.The Secretary, The Regional Transport Authority (West), Regional Transport Office, Trichy.

5.The Secretary, The Regional Transport Authority, Regional Transport Office, Dindigul.

.