Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32841 (MAD)

Balamanikandan PN v. The Deputy Transport Commissioner

WP(MD)/15350/2026 · 2026-06-09

D Bharatha Chakravarthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 09.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 P.N.Balamanikandan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Madurai Zone, Madurai. 2.The Regional Transport Officer, Madurai South, Madurai. 3.The Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade-I, Regional Transport Office, Tirunelveli. ... Respondents [R3 is suo-motu impleaded vide order dated 09.06.2026 in the above writ petition] PRAYER :- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner`s representation dated 13.05.2026, on the basis of the inspection report dated 18.12.2024 submitted by the Regional Transport Officer, Tirunelveli, and consequently cancel the Registration Certificate relating to the petitioner`s vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-58-BY-3524, in accordance with law, within a time frame fixed by this Court. 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 For Petitioner : Mr.R.Yeswanth For Respondents : Mr.S.Vashik Ali Government Standing Counsel for R1 & R2 Mr.I.Murugesan Government Advocate (Crl. side) for R3 ORDER The Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 13.05.2026. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's vehicle was involved in an accident and was completely damaged. In order to claim insurance for a 100% loss, the petitioner needed a certificate from the second respondent to that effect, which was not given. Therefore, a representation was made, and the petitioner has come before this Court. 3. The learned Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that it is true that there was an earlier report from the third respondent. However, upon finding deficiencies in the 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 said report, the third respondent was requested to conduct a fresh inspection and submit a fresh report. Based on the report received from the third respondent, the second respondent will ultimately issue the certificate. 4. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms: (i) The third respondent shall make a fresh inspection and submit a report, along with photographs, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of this order; (ii) Upon receipt of the report from the third respondent, the second respondent shall pass further consequential orders in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter, and the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. (iii) No costs. 09.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No sji TO 1.The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Madurai Zone, Madurai. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 2.The Regional Transport Officer, Madurai South, Madurai. 3.The Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade-I, Regional Transport Office, Tirunelveli. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD). No.15350 of 2026 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. sji WP(MD) No.15350 of 2026 Date : 09.06.2026 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis