2000SCMR1181 (PLP)

RANA BHAGWAN DAS, J.

Leave to appeal is sought against the order dated 4-11-1999 passed by a learned Division Bench of the Sindh High Court dismissing Constitutional petition preferred by the petitioners against the respondents challenging the vires of notice issued by the Railways Authorities dated 25-10-1999 issued to petitioner No.58 i.e. Izharuddin intimating him that a public auction of vending stalls shall be held on 4-11-1999.

2. Petitioners impugned the legality of impugned notice before the High Court on the ground that the device of public auction was mala fide and in fact respondents intended to oblige their favourites by disclocating the petitioners from their respective stalls. Learned High Court finding that the petitioners were not debarred from taking part in the public auction and the notice itself indicating that vending stalls were intended to be disposed of in a lawful and transparent manner, dismissed the petition in limine giving rise to the present petition for leave to appeal. 2-A. At the hearing learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioners by virtue of paying rent to the Railways Authorities had acquired the status of lawful tenants in respect of. their respective stalls thus they could not be dislodged in the manner proposed by the respondents. There is no gainsaying that seemingly the status of the petitioners is no better than licensees as admittedly there is no agreement of tenancy between any of the petitioners and the respondents to uphold the claim of the petitioners. If the respondents acting in the larger public interest have decided to do away with the practice of renewal of existing licences in favour of the petitioners which policy was highlighted in the case reported as Shaukat Hayat v. Government of Pakistan through Pakistan Railways (PLD 1997 SC 342) no lawful exception can be taken to the course of action adopted by' the respondents. Obviously petitioners do not have any vested legal right of holding perpetual licence to carry on their business without the participation of anyone else. Such licences, in law are always revocable after reasonable notice and in due process of law. View taken by the learned High Court is, therefore. not open to any exception and we do not feel inclined to interfere with the exercise of discretion which was neither arbitrary nor in violation of the settled principles of law. In fact the controversy has been set at rest in Shaukat Hayat's case (supra) which holds the- field and has been followed by this Court in subsequent cases.

3. For these reasons there is no substance in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal refused, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek their remedy before the proper, forum with the caution that the respondents shall act fairly. justly, equitably and strictly in accordance with law M.B.A./R-5/S M Petition dismissed.