2008 PLP 1474 (CLC)
MARKET COMMITTEE, DIJKOT ROAD, FAISALABAD through Administrator and another — Appellants Versus ABDUL JABBAR — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 1474 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Syed Asghar Haider and Khalil Ahmad, JJ |
| Parties | MARKET COMMITTEE, DIJKOT ROAD, FAISALABAD through Administrator and another — Appellants Versus ABDUL JABBAR — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance (XXIII of 1978) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 1474 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance (XXIII of 1978) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 1474 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Asghar Haider and Khalil Ahmad, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 1474 (CLC) (MARKET COMMITTEE, DIJKOT ROAD, FAISALABAD through Administrator and another — Appellants Versus ABDUL JABBAR — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shoaib Zafar for Appellants.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 19 & 36
Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S.3
Charging entry fee or cycle stand fee
Appellant had called in question order passed by the Single Judge of High Court whereby the act of Market Committee in charging entry fee or cycle stand fee had been declared to be ultra vires and without lawful authority
Provisions of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance, 1978 or bye-laws of the Market Committee made or adopted under S.36 of the Ordinance, did not permit charging of entry fee or cycle fee
Market Committee was authorized to levy any fee under section 19 of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Ordinance, 1978 only if the bye-laws of the Committee had been so amended to provide for levy ' of such fee
Executive direction or permission to Market Committee could not, by itself, assume the status of bye-laws
Appellant could not go beyond their bye-laws which did not provide for charging such kind of fee
Impugned judgment being not open to any exception, intra-Court appeal was dismissed. PLD 1989 Lah. 363 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Through this appeal the appellant has called in question the order dated 13-6-2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in chamber whereby the act of the appellant-Market Committee in charging entry fee or a cycle-stand fee has been declared to be ultra vires and without lawful authority.
2. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the appellant are that the learned single Judge in chamber has intermingled the term tax with fee and as such misinterpreted the judgment of this Court cited as PLD 1989 Lah. 363 which struck down the levy of special cess and not the fee. The appellants are charging fee in lieu of the parking space provided to the respondents under permission from the Punjab Government Agriculture Department and they have been allowed to lease out the parking stand through open auction for public use under supervision of the Market Committee.
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. It is an admitted fact that the provisions of the Ordinance or bye-laws of the Market Committee made or adopted under section 36 of the said Ordinance do not permit charging of entry fee or cycle stand fee. The Market Committee is authorized to levy any fee under section 19 of the Ordinance only if the bye-laws of the Committee have been so amended to provide for levy of such fee. It is also not denied that executive direction or permission to Market Committee cannot by itself assume the status of bye-laws. The appellants cannot go beyond their bye-laws which do not provide for charging such kind of fee.
5. For the above stated reasons the impugned judgment is not open to any exception. This Intra-Court Appeal is devoid of any force and is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./M-237/L I.C.A. dismissed.