THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.33510 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioners dated 12.12.2011 and proceeding with the grant of new three wheeler auto rickshaw permits in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.133, dated 24.11.2011, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners and till such time not to proceed with grant of new permits of three wheeler auto rickshaws. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present writ petition are as follows: Petitioner No.1 is the Joint Action Committee, whereas petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are different auto rickshaw unions and samakya. The first respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.137, Transport, Roads & Buildings (TR.II) Department, dated 06.08.2002 imposing restriction of auto rickshaw permits to 68,469 on the ground that they are posing problem of congestion in road traffic and also causing atmosphere pollution. Thereafter no new auto rickshaw permit was granted except where the old auto rickshaw being scrapped and new permits are being obtained by replacing the old vehicle with LPG/CNG. While so, the first respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.133, Transport, Roads & Buildings (TR.II) Department, dated 24.11.2011 deciding to issue 3500 new auto rickshaw permits and the auto rickshaws should ply with LPG and CNG only. Thereafter, certain guidelines were issued vide proceedings dated 02.12.2011 for implementation of the said scheme. The grievance of the petitioners is that the new auto rickshaw permits are sought to be granted contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the Rules made thereunder. Further, major of the autos are going to be purchased by the private financiers and they are only namesake owners, later the same will be sold in the black market. If the restrictions are not imposed, very object of granting permission to new auto rickshaws will be defeated. Therefore, they made a representation dated 12.12.2011 to the respondents requesting for grant of new auto rickshaw permits to poor eligible auto rickshaw drivers, but the same not been considered so far. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in spite of the petitioners giving representation, the respondents have not taken any action. Hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners and till such time not to proceed with the grant of new permits of three wheeler auto rickshaws. 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport contended that appropriate decision would be taken by the second respondent on the representation of the petitioners, in accordance with law. 5 . The grievance of the petitioners is that in spite of giving a representation, the second respondent has not taken any action in terms of G.O.Ms.No.133, dated 24.11.2011. The second respondent has to take appropriate decision in accordance with law, particularly with reference to G.O.Ms.No.133, dated 24.11.2011. 6. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to take appropriate action on the representation of the petitioners dated 12.12.2011 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.113, dated 24.11.2011, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU,J Dated: 20.12.2011 Note: Issue CC in three days B/o va