P L D 1961 W (PLP)

Route permit‑New permits to be granted if there is genuine need to increase transport facilities. Abdur Rahim for Appellant. Secretary, R. T. A., Rawalpindi for Respondent. This case will dispose of the three connected appeals Nos. 118, 121, 125 of 1956‑5q. The facts briefly are as follows :‑ The Peoples' Transport Company, one of the appellants, invited the attention of the Chairman, Regional Transport Authority Rawal pindi to the fact that there. were transport companies who did not own the requisite number of vehicles i.e., sufficient in number to ply on the routes for which they held permits. As a result these companies had taken on lease vehicles belonging to other concerns and this rays a practice which led to abuses, and interference in this state of affairs by the Regional Transport Authority would be justified. The matter was considered by the Authority in their meeting held on the 15th and 16th January 1959 when they decided that parties owning buses engaged on commission basis with other permit‑holders should be given permits i.e., instead of those who did not own vehicles and the latter's permits should be cancelled. In pursuance of this decision applications were invited and these were considered in the Authority's meeting held on 10th March 195.9. The Authority came to two different con clusions regarding public carriers and stage carriages respectively. As regards the former category they gave additional permits to the parties owning vehicles leased out and also allowed a time of three months to the existing permit‑holders to make up the number of vehicles required of them. As regards stage carriers the Authority did not grant new permits to the owners of vehicles though it gave time to the existing permit‑holders to obtain their own buses. An appeal against the latter part of the Authority's decision has been preferred by the Peoples' Transport Company and Ch. Muhammad Ismail and Parvaiz Ali who had leased out one vehicle each to the Mechanical Himalaya Transport Company and Riaz Transport Company on Lahore‑ Rawalpindi and Gujrat‑Rawalpindi routes. Three main arguments have been raised in this appeal. Firstly that it was invidious, to treat public carriers and stag carriers differently and the same principle should have been followed in the case of these two categories of permit holders Secondly that the subsequent order of 10th March amounts to a review of the earlier decision of 15th and 16th January 1959 when it was definitely decided that the owners of leased out vehicles would be sanctioned permits and was therefore incompetent. Thirdly that there is a genuine need for increasing transport facilities on the Lahore‑ Rawalpindi route and Gujrat‑Rawalpindi route. I consider the last contention the most forceful of the three. It is admitted on behalf of the Regional Transport Authority that the number of vehicles plying on these routes has remained almost unchanged since 1952 as there has been an addition of two vehicles since then. It is almost a truism that since 1952 the demands of the public for transport facilities on these routes have increased quite considerably. In addition to the normal increase in the numbers of the travelling public a new and very important factor has come into being since 1959 as the capital of the country has been shifted from Karachi to Rawalpindi. It have also to be taken into consideration that the two appellants have almost fallen out with their previous lessees of vehicles and in this trouble the R. T. A. had quite an important hand as it was they who invited fresh applications for permits on these routes and laid down a definite policy which they subsequently did not implement, with the result that the two appellant companies have suffered thereby. I would accordingly accept these two appeals and direct that the Peoples' Transport Company and Ch. Muhammad Ismail Parvaiz Ali Transport Company should be granted two permits to ply between Lahore and Rawalpindi jointly and they should also have a vehicle as a stand‑by in reserve. The Peoples' Transport Company should also be granted one permit to ply between Gujrat‑Rawal pindi and they should have one vehicle as standby. Needless to add that the two appellant companies will have to provide other amenities which the R. T.A. may lay down, in the nature of stands etc. along the routes to the satisfaction of the Authority. K. M. A. Appeal accepted.