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) 37706

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
H.Mohammed Khansha – Appellant
Versus
Regional Transport Authority cum District Collector – Respondent
Writ Petition|R.No.15302/A2/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.Padmanabhan
For the Respondents:Mr.P.Thambidurai Government Advocate

Regional Transport Officer cannot reject applications; must forward to Authority for merits decision.

Headnote:Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner sought to quash the Regional Transport Officer's order returning a belated application for a mini bus stage carriage permit on a 'first come, first served' basis. The court found that the Officer lacked authority to reject applications, with final decisions resting solely with the Regional Transport Authority, the District Collector. The application was returned as it was received after initial submissions. The key issue was whether the Regional Transport Officer could return applications on timeliness grounds. The court reasoned that the Officer’s role is limited to receiving and forwarding applications to the Authority for merit-based consideration, including personal hearings, irrespective of submission timing. The writ petition was disposed of, directing the petitioner to re-present the application within one week, the Officer to forward it promptly, and the Authority to decide within twelve weeks after hearing all parties.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges return of belated bus permit application (Para 1 , 2)
2. officer receives but authority decides applications (Para 3 , 4)
3. officer must forward; authority grants hearing and decides (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed for issuance of writ a Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order of the second respondent dated 09.03.2026, by which the application of the petitioner dated 05.03.2026 for grant of a mini bus stage carriage permit to ply on the route Mattuthavani Bus Stand to Fathima Nagar was returned, to quash the same and further to direct the respondents to receive the petitioner's application and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. 2.Upon perusal of the impugned order, it can be seen that the Regional Transport Officer returned the application made by the petitioner on the ground that the applications have to be considered only on a “first come, first served” basis and since the petitioner's application was belated, the same was returned.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Regional Transport Officer is only the authority to receive the application, process the same and submit it to the Regional Transport Authority, namely the District Collector and that the Regional Transport Officer cannot pass orders rejecting or returning the application. It is for the petitioner to convince the Regional Transport Authority with reference to the legal position.

4.The learned Government Advocate, taking notice on behalf of the respondents, would submit that since the applications are to be decided on a “first come, first served” basis, the application was returned with the said endorsement.

5.I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

6.Since it is not in dispute that it is only the Regional Transport Authority, namely the District Collector, the first respondent, who is the authority to pass final orders on the application, notwithstanding the impugned order, the petitioner is permitted to re-present the application before the second respondent. The second respondent shall duly forward the same for the consideration by the first respondent. The first respondent shall consider the application, afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass final orders in accordance with law. 7.In view thereof, this Writ Petition is disposed of on the following terms:

i. Within one week from the date of receipt of a web copy of this order, the petitioner shall re-present the application before the second respondent.

ii. As and when such re-presentation is made, the second respondent shall duly forward the same to the first respondent in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

iii.The first respondent shall take up the application of the petitioner, provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other interested persons, and pass final orders in the manner known to law.

iv. The said proceedings shall be expedited and completed by the respondents 1 and 2 within a period of twelve weeks from the date of re-presentation of the application by the petitioner.

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