SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 5255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
N. Suriyakala – Appellant
Versus
The Regional Transport Autho – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.(MD).Nos.1730 and 1731 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 03.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.P(MD)Nos.1730 and 1731 of 2025

and

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.1230, 1231, 5499, 1237, 1238 & 5512 of 2025

N.Suriyakala ... Petitioner in both the W.Ps.

Vs

1.The Regional Transport Authority,

Kumbakonam Region,

Thanjavur District.

2.The Registering Authority / Secretary,

Regional Transport Officer,

Kumbakonam. ... Respondents in both the W.Ps.

PRAYER IN W.P.(MD)No.1730 of 2025:- Writ Petition filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of

Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents in

Gazette No.4 of Thanjavur District Gazette dated 06.12.2024 publishing the

order of the respondents in R.No.9513/A2/2024 dated 21.11.2024 declaring

the permit in respect of Vehicle No.TNP-7374 plying on the route

''Kumbakonam Bus Stand to Annal Agraharam'' as non-est with immediate

effect and further directing the General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport

1/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:46:33 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.(MD).Nos.1730 and 1731 of 2025

Corporation Ltd. (Kumbakonam Division), Kumbakonam, to provide

transport facility on the route immediately and to quash the same and further

direct the respondents to transfer the said permit along with the vehicle from

the name of the deceased permit holder R.Nagarajan in the name of the

petitioner pursuant to the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.31337 of 2024,

dated 20.12.2024.

PRAYER IN W.P.(MD)No.1731 of 2025:- Writ Petition filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of

Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondents in R.No.9513/A2/2024

dated 11.11.2024 cancelling the Registration Certificate in respect of Vehicle

No.TNP-7374 plying on the route ''Kumbakonam Bus Stand to Annal

Agraharam'' as non-est and to quash the same.

For Petitioner in both the W.Ps. : Mrs.Radha Gopalan

for Mr.Mohamed Ashik Jaman

For Respondents in both the W.Ps.: Mr.A.Oliraja

Government Advocate

COMMON ORDER

These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the order of

cancellation of the permit, which was published in the Official Gazette dated

06.12.2024 and cancellation of the Registration Certificate, dated 11.11.2024,

respectively.

2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:46:33 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.(MD).Nos.1730 and 1731 of 2025

2. Pursuant to the cancellation of the registration certificate, the permit

was also cancelled by the impugned order dated 06.12.2024. Challenging

both the cancellation of the registration certificate and the consequential

cancellation of the permit, the present two writ petitions have been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a show cause

notice dated 27.09.2024 was issued for the purpose of cancelling the

registration certificate, which was received by the petitioner’s husband

R.Nagarajan on 07.10.2024, when he was alive. After receipt of the said

notice, he passed away on 15.10.2024, and therefore, the petitioner was not

aware of the said show cause notice. Thereafter, the impugned order declaring

the certificate of registration as non est was passed on 11.11.2024, i.e., after

the demise of the owner of the bus, namely, the petitioner’s husband.

Subsequently, the permit was cancelled on 06.12.2024. Hence, these writ

petitions have been filed on the ground that both the orders were passed

against a dead person, in violation of the principles of natural justice.

3/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/02/2026 03:46:33 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.(MD).Nos.1730 and 1731 of 2025

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents

submitted that the vehicle had been hypothecated and was under the control

of the petitioner’s husband. Under these circumstances, the owner was issued

with a show cause notice. Since no reply was submitted, the impugned orders

came to be passed.

5. Considering the submissions made

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top