2004 PLP 732 (SCMR)
PROVINCE OF SINDH through Advocate-General High Court of Sindh, Karachi — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ISSA and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 732 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nazim Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ |
| Parties | PROVINCE OF SINDH through Advocate-General High Court of Sindh, Karachi — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ISSA and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Sindh Local Government Rules, 1964 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 732 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Sindh Local Government Rules, 1964 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 732 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nazim Hussain Siddiqui and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 732 (SCMR) (PROVINCE OF SINDH through Advocate-General High Court of Sindh, Karachi — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ISSA and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Suleman Habibullah, Additional A.-G. Sindh and Akhlaq Ahmed Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- R.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent (in Civil Petition No. 71-K of 2001).
- Date of hearing: 1st October, 2001.
- PROVINCE OF SINDH through Advocate-General High Court of Sindh, Karachi---Petitioners
- Miss Wajahat Niaz, Advocate-on-Record Intervenor.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 9-10-2003 of High Court of Sindh passed in Civil Petitions Nos.583, 749 and 583 of 1998).
R.19
Sindh Local Government Ordinance (XII of 1979), S.40 & Sched. II, Part-II
Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act (V of 1939)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Constitutional petition
Recovery of Dalali/Nangani Fee in respect of agricultural produce subject to levy of market fee under Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1939
High Court in Constitutional petition observed that authority could not recover such fee
Plea of authority was that Notification No.88-D of 1966; dated 10-8-1966 challenged earlier in suit and then in revision before High Court, could not be challenged again before High Court through Constitutional petition; that High Court had not considered R.19(1) of Sindh Local Government Rules, 1964 framed under S.40 of Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 1979, Sched. II, Part-II
Plea of respondent was that High Court had not examined impact of Notification No.SO-II(34)/91, dated 26-7-1991 with reference to his case
Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine such pleas. Miss Wajahat Niaz, Advocate-on-Record Intervenor.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 1st October, 2001. NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J.--This order will govern the Civil Petitions Nos.3-K and 71-K of 2001. Both the petitions were disposed of by a common judgment by High Court of Sindh. It was held that no Dalali/Nangani Fee could be recovered in respect of agriculture produce, which is subject to levy of Market Fee under the Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1939.
2. Learned Additional A.-G. contends that Notification No.88-D/66, dated 10-8-1966 issued by Commissioner's Office, Khaipur Division was earlier challenged in Civil Suit No.32 of 1979 before learned Civil Judge, Pannu Aaqil, in Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1980 before learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Sukkar, and in Civil Revision, No.23 of 1981 before High Court of Sindh, Sukkar Bench, as such, the same could not be challenged again through petitions before High Court Learned Additional A.-G. also argued-that rule 19(1) framed under section 40 of the Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 1979, Schedule II Part II, was not taken into consideration by High Court, when the impugned judgment was delivered. Said rule is as follows:-- "19. (1) A corporation municipal committee or town committee may establish and maintain public markets of any article of food and drink and provide places for use as public markets for the sale of articles of food and drink and of animals and secure the proper management and sanitation of such markets. (2) The council concerned may, in respect of a public market, provide by bye-laws:
(a) the fees to be charged for the use or for the right to expose food for sale in the market; (b) the fees to be levied on vehicles and animals bringing goods therein for sale; the fees to be charged for the use of shops, stalls pens or stamps; (c) the fees to be charged in respect of animals brought for sale or sold; and (d) the fees to be charged in respect of animals brought for sale or sold; and (e) the fees to be charged from brokers, commission agents, weighmen, and other person practising their calling therein."
3. Mr. R.A. Qureshi, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the case of respondent in Petition No.71-K of 2001 is different from that of Petition No.3-K of 2001 and that impact of Notification No.SO.II(34)/91, dated 26-7-1991 issued by the Government of Sindh, Housing Town Planning Local Government and Rural Development Department was not examined by High Court with reference to the case of the respondent of said petition.
4. Leave to appeal is granted to examine above pleas. S.A.K./P-4/S Leave granted.