M/S.Hum Heavy Driving School v. The State of Tamilnadu

Page Nos.1/6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 13.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.Nos.3848, 3850 & 3852 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.4266, 4267 & 4268 of 2026 M/s.HUM Heavy Driving School Represented by its Proprietor Thiru.Hari Babu ... Petitioner in W.P.No.3848 of 2026 M/s.Mani Heavy Driving School Represented by its Proprietor Thiru.G.Mani ... Petitioner in W.P.No.3850 of 2026 M/s.Sarathi Heavy Driving School Represented by its Proprietor Thiru.P.Sarathy ... Petitioner in W.P.No.3852 of 2026 vs.

¶1The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Principal Secretary Home (Transport-5) Department Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The Transport Commissioner Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. Page Nos.2/6

¶3The Regional Transport Officer Regional Transport Office Ranipet – 632 403. … Respondents Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order of the 3rd respondent dated 20.03.2025 made in Na.Ka.No.6646/E2/2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to grant permission to the petitioners to conudct the one day refresher course for renewal of Heavy Vehicle Driving License. For Petitioner in all WPs : Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents in all WPs : Mr.P.Siddarth Government Counsel ***** C O M M O N O R D E R The petitioners challenge the common communication dated

20.03.2025 issued by the third respondent, whereby their applications seeking permission to conduct a one-day Refresher Training Course for heavy vehicle drivers and to issue certificates enabling such drivers to renew their driving licences were rejected. Page Nos.3/6

¶2The petitioners are running Driving Schools after obtaining the necessary permission from the competent authority. They submitted applications to the third respondent seeking permission to conduct a one-day Refresher Training Course in terms of G.O.Ms.No.215, Home (Transport-5) Department, dated 05.05.2022. However, the applications were rejected on the ground that the petitioners were not parties to W.P.No.19362 of 2015.

¶3Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶4Earlier, the Heavy Motor Vehicle Driving Schools Association had filed W.P.No.19362 of 2015 challenging the Government policy under which only two Government institutions were authorised to conduct the one-day Refresher Training Course for heavy vehicle drivers and to issue certificates for renewal of driving licences. This Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner therein to submit a representation to the respondents within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, and further directed the respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Page Nos.4/6

¶5Pursuant to the said directions, the first respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.215 dated 05.05.2022. Under the said Government Order, after examining the proposal submitted by the Transport Commissioner and in compliance with the directions of this Court, the Government permitted Heavy Motor Vehicle Driving Schools to conduct the one-day Refresher Training Course for heavy vehicle drivers and to issue certificates enabling them to renew their driving licences. Despite the said Government Order, the petitioners' applications came to be rejected by the impugned communication.

¶6A reading of G.O.Ms.No.215 dated 05.05.2022 makes it clear that the benefit conferred under the Government Order is not restricted to the petitioner in W.P.No.19362 of 2015. On the contrary, the Government has taken a policy decision permitting Heavy Motor Vehicle Driving Schools to conduct the one-day Refresher Training Course for heavy vehicle drivers and to issue the requisite certificates. Therefore, the impugned communication issued by the third respondent is contrary to the said Government Order. The petitioners are consequently entitled to have their applications considered for permission to conduct the one-day Refresher Training Course and to issue certificates, subject to their satisfying the other eligibility requirements Page Nos.5/6 prescribed under law.

¶7In view of the above, the Writ Petitions are allowed and the common communication dated 20.03.2025 issued by the third respondent is set aside. The second respondent is directed to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners afresh, on their own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without insisting that the petitioners establish that they were parties to W.P.No.19362 of 2015. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

13.07.2026 Speaking / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No mk To

¶1The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Principal Secretary Home (Transport-5) Department Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The Transport Commissioner Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶3The Regional Transport Officer Regional Transport Office Ranipet – 632 403. Page Nos.6/6 HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J., mk W.P.Nos.3848, 3850 & 3852 of 2026

13.07.2026