AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader,
appearing on behalf of the Respondent.
At this stage of hearing of the writ petition, a counter affidavit, dated 20.06.2011, has been filed on behalf of the Respondent.
Paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the counter affidavit reads as follows:
I submit that according to the present territorial jurisdiction of the RTO, Dharapuram the major portion of the Writ Petitioner''s route falls within
the jurisdiction of RTO Dharapuram and this as on date the RTA Dharapuram @ Tirupur is the authority competent to consider the variation
application under issue. Because of the formation of Regional Transport Offices one after another the whereabouts: of the original application
originally filed before the RTO Erode could not be easily ascertained till date.
It is submit that this authority i.e., RTA Dharapuram came to aware that one such variation application is pending disposal, only after the W.P.
No. 10341 of 2011 is filed by the Petitioner. However we are making sincere efforts to locate the variation application and dispose the same on
merits and in accordance with law. This will take considerable time not less than three months so as to send notice to all sector operators and
conduct hearing by the RTA. It will be disposed off as soon as the variation application is found out.
In view of the averments made in Paragraph Nos. 3 and 4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent, the Respondent is directed
to consider the application, dated 28.12.1995, and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the operators in the sector concerned.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.