P L D (PLP)
(Groups A & C)‑Appellants Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, LAHORE AND OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | A. M. Khan Leghari, Member Board of Revenue West Pakistan |
| Parties | (Groups A & C)‑Appellants Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, LAHORE AND OTHERS‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: A. M. Khan Leghari, Member Board of Revenue West Pakistan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D (PLP) ((Groups A & C)‑Appellants Versus THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, LAHORE AND OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
Route permit‑Temporary grant to Union Council‑Benamidar owner of bus‑Grant of permit, held not justified‑R. T. A. to observe regular procedure if need is genuine and not to exercise restrictive powers meant for temporary needs‑Motor Vehicles Apt (IV of 1939), Ss. 47, 57, & 62.
Judgment & Decree
Appellate Side No. 19 of 1961‑62, decided on 15th February 1962, District Lahore. Route permit‑Temporary grant to Union Council‑Benamidar owner of bus‑Grant of permit, held not justified‑R. T. A. to observe regular procedure if need is genuine and not to exercise restrictive powers meant for temporary needs‑Motor Vehicles Apt (IV of 1939), Ss. 47, 57, &
62. In my interim order, dated 30‑11‑1961, I had dealt with the main features in the appeal filed by Pattoki Bus Service Limited, groups `A' and `C', Lahore, against the Regional Transport Authority, Lahore's order, dated 1‑11‑1961 granting two temporary permits to the Chung Union Council District Lahore for the route between Bhai Pheru and Lahore. I had also called for reports from the Regional Transport Authority as well as Government in the Basic Democracies and Communications and Works Department. After perusal of these reports and hearing the representatives of the Regional Transport Authority and the respondent Chung Union Council, I have come to the conclusion, that the grant is wrongly conceived. The Chairman, Union Council, Chung has admitted that the bus does not belong to the Union Council but to a capitalist and through this grant in its name the Union Council ananging not only to provide bus services to workers and college students proceeding to Lahore and back, but also to derive a little income out of the permits in its naive. In my opinion it would be a sad day if Union Council began to take over permits and to trade in this manner with experienced benamidar owners of buses. The temporary grants of permits of this nature are not justified. If the needs are genuine, a case could be made out for throwing the route open, in which case the procedure prescribed under section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act should be adopted and the application received and adjudicated on in terms of section 47 of that Act. It is wrong in principle to allow the Basic Democracies to steal a march, through the exercise of, the R. T. A's power under section 62, which restricts the grant of temporary permits to seasonal and temporary needs as laid down in subsections (a), (b) and (c). In the result, therefore, the appeal is accepted and the, order of the Regional Transport Authority set aside. S. B. Appeal accepted.