P L D 1959 (W (PLP)
FEROZE DIN-Petitioner Versus R. T. A. RAWALPINDI‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1959 (W (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | A. T. Naqvi, Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan |
| Parties | FEROZE DIN-Petitioner Versus R. T. A. RAWALPINDI‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1959 (W (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1959 (W (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: A. T. Naqvi, Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1959 (W (PLP) (FEROZE DIN-Petitioner Versus R. T. A. RAWALPINDI‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Kh. Abdur Rahim for Appellants.
Headnotes / Summary
Route permit‑Permit‑holders hiring their vehicles to Army through Transport Department‑Preference over others, while considering question of grant of permanent permits.
Judgment & Decree
Kh. Abdur Rahim for Appellants. This order will dispose of 8 other appeals (R. O. A. M. Nos. 6 to 12 and 30) as the facts are identical. These appeals have been preferred against the order of the R. T. A Rawalpindi dated 4th to 8th August 1958, refusing to grant permanent public carrier permits to the appellants.
2. Briefly the facts are that in the year 1951, 11 persons in the Rawalpindi region, including the 9 appellants before me, hired out their vehicles to the Army through the department of the Provincial Transport Authority, West Pakistan, Lahore. The Provincial Transport Controller, in its meeting held on 20‑3‑1952, decided that in order to induce truck owners to hire their vehicles to the Army on voluntary basis, they may be allowed the following concessions :‑ "If a permit‑holder hires his vehicles to the Army through the Transport Department and is prepared to replace the vehicle hired, with the latest model; the replacement should be applied for forthwith and the permit‑holder should be given an assurance that as soon as his original vehicle is released by the Army, he will be given an additional permit in respect of that vehicle enabling him to use the vehicle for the remaining useful life i.e. till such time as it continues to be declared in a fit condition by the Board of Inspection." As a result of this decision,, the authority has been issuing as many as 11 temporary permits every four months, including the present appellants, who had hired out their vehicles to the Army. Subsequently on the recommendations of the R. T. A. these persons were allowed to deposit fee on permanent basis. As the R. T. A. Rawalpindi announced 30 vacancies, for the grant of public carrier permits in the region, the appellants applied for the grant of permanent permits. The Provincial Transport Controller West Pakistan, addressed a communication to the R. T. A. Rawalpindi, in the year 1957 that since these persons helped Government in national emergency and they own vehicles, they should be given preference over others while held considering the question of grant of permits. At its meeting from 4th to 8th August 1958, R. T. A. Rawalpindi, issued as many as 168 public carrier permits in favour of various parties but refused to issue permanent public carrier permits in favour of the appellants. It was observed by the Authority that present system of granting temporary permits of these trucks should continue so long as they were fit and roadworthy. The reasons given by the Authority in refusing the permanent public carrier permit are not convincing. Since these persons helped Government in a national emergency they should have been given preference over others while considering the question of grant of permits. The order of the Authority is sell aside and it is directed that all the nine appellants before me should be issued public carrier permits on permanent basis. K. M. A. ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Appeal accepted.