Rajini v. The Regional Transport Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA WP.No.
33033 of 2024 Rajini Petitioner No.5/68,433 Mariyamman Kovil Street, Azhagapuram, Periyapudur, Salem - 636 016.
Vs The Regional Transport Officer Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to receive petitioner's application for renewal of permit subsequently renew the contract carriage permit of his vehicle bearing registration No TN 30 L 5782 within a period fixed by this Hon'ble Court in pursuance of petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024. For Petitioner:
Mr.A.G.Narasimhan 1/8
For Respondent:
Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to receive petitioner's application for renewal of permit subsequently renew the contract carriage permit of his vehicle bearing registration No TN 30 L 5782 within a period fixed by this Hon'ble Court in pursuance of petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2024.
2. The petitioner held a contract carriage omni bus permit for vehicle number TN 30 L 5782 , valid till 28.08.2016 . He applied for permit renewal on 27.04.2024. Despite receiving and processing the application, the respondent has not yet passed an order on the renewal. Meanwhile, the petitioner has paid motor vehicle tax until. Due to the delay, on 08.10.2024, he sent a letter requesting for renewal of permit.
3. The petitioner argues that under Section 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the respondent is legally bound to process renewal applications bus has failed to do so. Additionally, Rule 136 of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Rules, 2/8
1989, mandates public hearings for permit applications, which the respondent has not conducted. He contends that without court intervention, the respondent will continue to delay the process. The delay has caused financial hardship, as the bus remains unused despite ongoing payments to the financier. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.
4. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's application for renewal of contract carriage omni bus permit dated 08.10.2024 would be considered on merits, in accordance with law within a time frame stipulated by this Court.
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. Without going into the merits of the case, the respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's application for renewal of contract carriage omni bus permit dated 08.10.2024 in respect of vehicle bearing registration No.TN 30 L 3/8
N.MALA., J.
vm/gv 5782 on merits, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations and direction. No costs.
10.07.2025 Vm/gv Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order To The Regional Transport Officer 4/8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA WP No. 33033 of 2024
1. RAJINI S/o.Mohan, No.5/68, 443 Mariyamman Kovil Street, Azhagapuram, Periyapudur, Salem-636 016.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Regional Transport Officer Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):
A.G. Narasimhan M. Subash-ms/2141/2013 I. Sheik Mohamed-ms/2683/2017 E. Aneesh Vinayak-ms/587/2023 For Respondent(s):
M/s. N. Naveen Kumar Govt Advocate For Respondents.
5/8
ORDER
Today, the above writ petition is listed under the caption ''For Being Mentioned'' at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court, vide order dated 10.07.2025, disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's application for renewal of contract carriage in respect of Three Wheeler. Learned counsel submits that however, in paragraphs No.2 and 6 of the aforesaid order, it has been mentioned as ''omni bus'' in stead of ''three-wheeler'' and hence, prays for appropriate orders. 3.Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Registry is directed to replace the words 'omni bus' with 'three-wheeler' in paragraphs No.2 and 6 and issue order copy to the parties forthwith. 29-08-2025 AP Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes 6/8
To 1.The Regional Transport Officer 7/8
N.MALA J.
AP WP No. 33033 of 2024 29.08.2025 8/8