AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 241 wordsM. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the Petitioner, as well as the Respondent.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that it would suffice, if the Respondent is directed to dispose of the application, dated 4.11.2004, in respect of the Petitioner''s vehicle, bearing No. TN-31/Y-9799, taking into consideration the Government Letter, bearing letter No. 90919/F2/2000, dated 29.11.2000, on merits, within a specified period.
The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on either side, the Respondent is directed to dispose of the application, dated 4.11.2004, in respect of the Petitioner''s vehicle, bearing No. TN-31/Y-9799, taking into consideration the Government Letter, bearing letter No. 90919/F2/2000, dated 29.11.2000, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, within a period 3 of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the application, dated 4.11.2004, to the Respondent, along with a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
The writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs.