P.R.Venkatraman v. The State Transport Authority

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.10.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN W.P.Nos.34249 to 34255 of 2015 P.R.Venkatraman [Petitioner in W.P.No.34249 of 2015] T.R.Rajendran [Petitioner in W.P.No.34250 of 2015] G.Saravanan [Petitioner in W.P.No.34251 of 2015] G.Saravanan [Petitioner in W.P.No.34252 of 2015] R.Ramakrishnan [Petitioner in W.P.No.34253 of 2015] R.Ramakrishnan [Petitioner in W.P.No.34254 of 2015] T.Maria Sousai [Petitioner in W.P.No.34255 of 2015] Vs The State Transport Authority Chepauk Chennai - 600 005 [ Respondent] Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's Application dated 3.9.2015, 3.9.2015, 3.9.2015, 7.9.2015, 11.10.2015 (dealt with in R.No.A3/52186/2015, 52187/2015, 46302/2015, 46303/2015, 51778/2015, 51779/2015 AND 51775/2015) for the grant of contract carriage Omni bus permit forthwith. For petitioner :

Mr.K.Hariharan For respondent :

Mr.M.S.Ramesh, AGP

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.S.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader, who took notice for the respondent and with their consent, the main writ petitions are taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2.These writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to the respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the respective applications of the petitioners for the grant of contract carriage Omni bus permit forthwith.

3. The petitioners have applied for issue of contract carriage omni bus permit before the respondent on 3.9.2015, 3.9.2015, 7.9.2015, 7.9.2015, 7.9.2015, 7.9.2015 and 11.10.2015 respectively, which were also received by the respondent. It is the contention of the petitioners that though the applications were received and the respondent assigned R.Nos.A3/52186/2015, A3/52187/2015, A3/46302/2015, A3/46303/2015, A3/51778/2015, A3/51779/2015 and A3/51775/2015 respectively, the same were not considered and orders passed either granting the permit or rejecting the same. As the inaction is running contrary to Rule 80(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the petitioners were constrained to come before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court has directed the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the applications.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader on the other hand submitted that sufficient time may be granted to the respondent to pass orders on the applications of the petitioners.

6. In view of the above submissions, without going into the merits of the case, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondent to consider the respective applications of the petitioners for the grant of contract carriage omni bus permit and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. sd/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(CS-VI) /TRUE COPY/ SUB-ASSISTANT REGISTRAR rg

To The State Transport authority Chepauk, Chennai-05.

+7 CC to MR.K.Hariharan Advocate. SR.NO. 58537 +1 CC to Govt.Pleader. SR.NO. 59146 W.P.Nos.34249 to 34255 of 2015 CO-SR JD 06/11/2015