Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
P. VELMURUGAN, K. K. RAMAKRISHNAN
G. Rajendran represented by his Power of Attorney G. Ashikdeen – Appellant
Versus
R. Gopinath – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN.,J)
These Writ Appeals are directed against the order of this Court made in W.P(MD)No.19413 of 2014,W.P(MD)No.19737 of 2016 and W.P(MD)No.20130 of 2014,dated 29.08.20216 and for consequential relief as stated supra.
2. Originally the Writ Petitioners/appellants filed applications before the third respondent for grant of mini bus permits to ply on the route of Theni Housing Board Colony to RMTC Nagar. It was rejected by the third respondent. Challenging the same, the appellant filed an appeal before the second respondent herein. The second respondent set aside the order of the third respondent and directed him to give permit to the appellant and challenging the same, the first respondent filed W.P(MD)No.19413 of 2014, third respondent filed Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.20130 of 2014 and the fourth respondent filed Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.19737 of 2016. Since all the Writ Petitions arising out of the same order passed by the second respondent, all the Writ Petitions are heard together and a common order dated 29.8.2016 is pa
The court emphasized the necessity of balancing public safety with the provision of transport services, ruling against arbitrary rejections of permit applications.
Mini buses are classified as stage carriages entitled to apply for spare permits, ensuring continuity of service under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of the petitioner's request was justified based on the served sector exceeding the permitted norms as per the relevant govern....
An appellate authority can only reverse a decision if an error has resulted in a failure of justice, affirming limitations on their jurisdiction.
The authority may modify transportation permits for traffic management without violating fundamental terms, and such modifications are legally justified if properly reasoned.
The judgment clarifies that existing town service permits must be considered when evaluating overlaps in routes under the Motor Vehicles Act, reinforcing rights to temporary permits under certain con....
The grant of permits to private operators on nationalized routes is prohibited under the scheme framed under Chapter IVA of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article