P L D 1959 (W (PLP)

2. The facts of these cases are that the appellants are refugees from Jammu and Kashmir State and were enjoying the privilege of continuous public carrier permits since partition. Since that time i.e. for nearly 11 years, the appellants had been holding temporary public carrier permit as the R. T. A., Rawalpindi, had been renewing the permits from time to time in their favour. In the year 1956, the R. T. A., considered the desirability of continuation of the issue of five tem porary public carrier permits to the appellants and in its meeting held on 17‑12‑1956, it was decided that a reference be made to the Provincial Transport Controller, for making these permits permanent from the quota of the P. T. C. without effecting the Regional quota fixed by the P. T. C. This item was consequently placed in the meeting of the R. T. A., held on 21‑5‑1958 to 23‑5‑1958. The meeting had to be postponed for one reason or the other ultimately in its meeting held on 4‑8‑58 to 8‑8‑1958, the R. T. A., Rawalpindi, decided that no further temporary permits should be allowed to them when the Authority has decided to issue more public carrier permits on permanent basis for vehicles of 1950 subsequent models.

3. The order of the Authority appealed against is not justified for the following reasons :- (i) It is alleged that the criteria laid down for the grant of public carrier permits was fully satisfied by the appellants, inasmuch as before partition in Jammu and Kashmir State, four of them were in the transport line and since 1947 all of them have been in the public carrier transport business and that they owned their own vehicles and had a preferential right to the grant of permanent public carrier permits. (ii) As the appellants were holding temporary public carrier permits for about 11 years, and should have been preferred to new‑comers and outsiders. (iii) It was not necessary for the appellants to make fresh applications for the grant of regular permits in the prescribed form as the authority had been seized of their cases from as far back as 1952 and certainly from the meeting of 17‑12‑1956, onwards. Since their cases were pending before the Authority it is for considerations as to whether they should have applied in response to fresh invitation. (iv) It is further alleged that three of the appellants possessed the required model vehicles and the rest of the appellants were prepared to procure vehicles of 1950 or more recent model.

4. From the aforesaid observations, it is clear that the Authority has not approached the case of appellants from the correct angle, in view of the fact that they are Jammu and Kashmir Muhajars, residing in Pakistan, having no sources of their livelihood. In the circumstances, the order of the Authority is set aside and the cases are remanded for a present disposel. K.M.A. Case remanded.