M.Abdullah v. The Regional Transport Authority,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD)No.35960 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.28572 of 2025 M.Abdullah ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Regional Transport Authority, Trichy District, Trichy.

2.The Regional Transport Officer, Tiruchirappalli West, Tiruchirappalli District.

3.C.Shanmugasundaram ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent's Mini Bus permit bearing Registration No.TN TCW 2266 plying on the route Manapparai Bus Stand to Puthanatham HP Bunk Under Sections 86 (1) (c) and (d) of the Central Motor Vehicle Act 1988 violating the permit condition and for other reliefs.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr. A.C.Asaithambi For Respondents : Mr. K.Balasubramani, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 and R2.

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus as against the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent's Mini Bus permit bearing Registration No.TN TCW 2266 plying on the route Manapparai Bus Stand to Puthanatham HP Bunk Under Sections 86 (1) (c) and (d) of the Central Motor Vehicle Act 1988, violating the permit condition and for other reliefs

2. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. Since no adverse order is going to be passed as against the 3rd respondent, notice to him is dispensed with.

3. According to the petitioner, he is the Mini Stage Carriage Operator as well as the Sector Operator and he is now operating on the subject route following the procedure contemplated under the scheme as well as the Act and Rules. Likewise, the third respondent already 2/6

granted a Mini Bus permit on the subject route. Now after obtaining migration to his Mini Bus, the third respondent is overlapping on his route without operating original route. In view of the illegal, unauthorized operation of the third respondent, the petitioner is very much affected with revenue loss. Hence, narrating all the above facts, the petitioner made a representation before the respondents 1 and 2 on 12.11.2025. Since no action has been taken till date, the petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, after getting instructions, would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner and one Chidambaram, enquiry proceedings are initiated and the same is under process.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that since based on the complaint given by the petitioner, already enquiry proceedings are initiated and same is under process, no Mandamus can be required consequent to the filing of the Writ Petition. Hence, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 3/6

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, according to the respondents, enquiry proceedings has already been commenced, the first respondent shall complete the enquiry as early as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

16.12.2025 vsm Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No 4/6

To 1.The Regional Transport Authority, Trichy District, Trichy.

2.The Regional Transport Officer, Tiruchirappalli West, Tiruchirappalli District.

5/6

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

vsm W.P.(MD)No.35960 of 2025 16.12.2025 6/6