Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 3579 (MAD)

M. Ananthi v. State Transport Authority, Chepauk

2012-08-14

M.JAICHANDREN

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. Even though, the prayer in the writ petition pertains to two vehicles, the learned counsel for the petitioner had restricted the relief to one vehicle, bearing registration No.PY-02/J-1857. He has also made an endorsement to that effect. 3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the issues involved in this writ petition are covered by the order of this Court, dated 24.4.2007 made in W.P.Nos.15061 to 15063 of 2007, and the order , dated 27.04.2011, passed in W.P.No.11095 of 2011, wherein, this Court had directed the respondents therein to receive the tax, as and when it is voluntarily tendered, by the petitioners therein, in advance, for 7 days, 30 days or 90 days, without insisting on the payment of 1/10th of the quarterly, tax for every entry into Tamil Nadu, in respect of the petitioners' vehicles concerned. 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents have no objection for this Court following its earlier orders, dated 24.4.2007 and 27.04.2011. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and in view of the order passed by this Court, on 24.4.2007, in W.P.Nos.15061 to 15063 of 2007, and the order, dated 27.04.2011, made in W.P.No.11095 of 2011, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents concerned to receive the tax, as and when it is voluntarily tendered by the petitioner, in advance, for 7 days, 30 days or 90 days, without insisting on the payment of 1/10th of the quarterly tax, for every entry into Tamil Nadu, in respect of the petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No. PY-02/J-1857. No costs.