P L D (Rev (PLP)
BAHADUR KHAN ‑‑Appellant Versus R. T. A., RAWALPINDI AND CROWN‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D (Rev (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | BAHADUR KHAN ‑‑Appellant Versus R. T. A., RAWALPINDI AND CROWN‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D (Rev (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D (Rev (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D (Rev (PLP) (BAHADUR KHAN ‑‑Appellant Versus R. T. A., RAWALPINDI AND CROWN‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 58‑Permanent private carriers permit‑Renewal may not be refused on vague ground that permit is liable to be abused.
Judgment & Decree
AKHTER HUSAIN, F. C. ‑This is an appeal against the order dated 30th April 1951 of the R. T. A., Rawalpindi, refusing the renewal of the permanent private carrier permits.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant applied for the renewal of his private carriage permits for another three years in respect of the permits which expired in 1950. The R. T. A., Rawalpindi, found that the appellant was holding three public carrier permits and 8 temporary private carriers permits and held that permanent private carriers permits were liable to abuse and were in fact being abused in the Region and when the needs of the contractor could he met with temporary private carriers permits, the Authority found no reasons to renew these three permanent private carriers permits and rejected the application of the appellant.
3. The R. T. A. has pointed out that the case of the appellant was also considered by P. T. A., Punjab, Lahore, who held that the appellant was only a kiln‑owner, Iron Merchant and a Military Contractor and the extent of his business activities were not known at all. The appellant has held three permanent private carriers permits for the whole of the Rawalpindi region for the carriage of building and kiln material for over 10 years. It will be hard to reduce these permits to temporary permits now for the vague reason that permanent permits are liable to abuse. I accept the appeal and direct that the permanent carriers' permits shall be renewed. Announced. A. H. Appeal allowed.