← Library
Madras High CourtWP/3190/2018disposed of

A.Venkatakrishnan, v. The State Transport Authority

2018-02-14Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition No.3190 of 2018 A.Venkatakrishnan Sri Jayanthi service 260, Kamaraj Salai, Puducherry - 605 013.

.. Petitioner Vs.

1.The State Transport Authority Puducherry.

2.The Secretary State Transport Authority Puducherry.

.. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to implement the order of the 1st respondent, the State Transport Authority, Puducherry granting variation of permit conditions in Proceedings No.14/Py/90/TD/TP:1/94 dated 30.01.1995 by convening a Timings Conference and fix suitable timings forthwith.

For Petitioner: Mr.M.Krishnappan Senior Counsel for Mrs.R.Swarnalatha For Respondents: Mr.J.Kumaran Government Advocate (Puducherry)

O R D E R

Mr.J.Kumaran, learned Government Advocate (Puducherry) takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing the second respondent to implement the order of the 1st respondent, granting variation of permit conditions in Proceedings No.14/Py/90/TD/TP:1/94 dated 30.01.1995, by convening a Timings Conference and fix suitable timings forthwith. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the said order of the first respondent dated 30.01.1995, though was challenged before this Court in WP.No.43903 of 2002, the said writ petition itself was dismissed as withdrawn on 17.04.2013 and therefore, the second respondent cannot have any impediment in implementing the said order of the first respondent. He further submitted that the petitioner has made a representation on 13.05.2013, followed by another representation on 26.10.2015, seeking to implement the order of the 1st respondent. As both the representations were not considered so far, the petitioner has approached this Court and filed the present writ petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Puducherry) for the respondents submitted that the representations made by the petitioner will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed within a time stipulated by this Court.

5. Considering the above stated facts and circumstances and the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Puducherry), this writ petition is disposed of, only with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 13.05.2013 and 26.10.2015 and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mk To 1.The State Transport Authority, Puducherry.

2.The Secretary State Transport Authority, Puducherry.

+ 1 cc to Mrs. R. Swarnalatha, Advocate SWr.11127 + 1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.11347 W.P.No.3190 of 2018 (CS-Iv) EU(21/02/2018) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/