Jharsanya Logistics Pvt. Ltd., v. The State Transport Authority,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.04.2015 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.Nos.13339 and 13340 of 2015 Jharsanya Logistics Pvt. Ltd.

Rep. By its Director Mrs.Chandrakala ... Petitioner in both WPs vs.

The State Transport Authority, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 ... Respondent in both WPs PRAYER in both WPs. : These Writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's application dated 24.9.2013 (dealt with in R.No.51883/ A3/2013 and 51884/A3/2013) for grant of Contract Carriage Omni Bus Permit forthwith.

For Petitioners: Mr.K.Hariharan in both WPs For Respondent : Mr.R.Lakshminarayanan in both WPs Additional Government Pleader C O M M O N O R D E R There are two writ petitions are filed by M/s. Jharsanya Logistics Private Limited, represented by its Director Mrs. Chandrakala, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to consider and pass orders on his application dated 24.09.2013 (dealt with in R.Nos.51883/A3/2013 and 51884/A3/2014) for grant of Contract Carriage Omni Bus Permit, forthwith.

2. Mr. R. Lakshminaryananan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. With the consent of both parties, the petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself.

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

3. The petitioner being a tourist bus operator, applied for a contract carriage omni bus permit on 24.09.2013 before the respondent. The application of the petitioner was also received and thereupon the respondent has assigned R. No.51883/A3/2013, to his application. The grievance of the petitioner is, till date the respondent has not passed any order, neither granting the permit nor rejecting the same. As the inaction is running contrary to Rule 80

(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, the petitioner was constrained to come this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, further submitted that this Court, in similar circumstances, while considering the effect of the provisions under section 80(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, has directed the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on the applications.

5. At this point of time, learned Additional Government Pleader requested this Court to grant eight weeks time to consider and pass orders on the applications of the petitioner. Therefore, considering the request of the petitioner, the respondent is directed to pass orders on the applications of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs.

avr s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To The State Transport Authority, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 + 2 ccs to Mr.K.Hariharan, Advocate SR 24350 + 1 cc to Govt.Pleader SR 24715 mg(co) prk28/5 W.P.Nos.13339 and 13340 of 2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/