AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the second Respondent, dated 22.3.2011, rejecting the application of the Petitioner for replacement of the vehicle in the place of the existing vehicle bearing registration No. TN-46-B-7799.
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that an appeal is pending before the third Respondent appellate Tribunal, in Appeal No. 49 of 2010. He had also submitted that the Petitioner may be directed to move an application before the third Respondent appellate Tribunal for the replacement of the vehicle in question, as per law.
The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that a direction may be issued to the third Respondent appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeal, in Appeal No. 49 of 2010, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, the third Respondent appellate Tribunal is directed to dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioner, in Appeal No. 49 of 2010, as expeditiously as possible, not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, it goes without saying that it would be open to the Petitioner to move an appropriate application before the third Respondent appellate tribunal for the replacement of the vehicle in question, in the manner known to law. The Registry is directed to return the original impugned order to the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected M.P. No. 1 of 2011 is closed.