Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Appeal No. 198 of 1948-49, decided on 19th January 1950, from the order of R. T. A., Rawalpindi, dated 12th July, 1950.
Motor Vehicles Act (IV of 1939), S.58-Powers of Transport Authority -May invite applications and issue Permits-But no concern to form new Transport Company.
To form a new transport company in which all interests will be represented may be an extremely laudable one, but it is not the function of a Transport Authority.
The proper course for the Authority is to call for applica tions for the operation of services on the routes in question on a permanent basis and to grant permanent permits under section 58 for such period between 3 and 5 years, as it may in its direction decide.
This order disposes of two appeals, one by the Zamindara Transport Company Ltd., Mandi Bahauddin, and the other by the Gujrat Bus Ltd., Gujrat, against the order of the Regional Transport Authority, Rawalpindi, dated the 12th July, 1949, in which that Authority concerned itself with the forma tion of a Transport Co-operative Society to which it proposed to transfer the permits for stage carriage services in the Mandi Bahauddin area. The position at present is that these services are being operated by the Zamindara Transport Company Ltd., Mandi Bahauddin, on temporary permits.
The attempt by the Regional Transport Authority to form a new transport company in which all interests will be represented may be an extremely laudable one, but it is not the function of a Transport Authority. It is also incorrect for the Regional Transport Authority to be issuing temporary permits for the operation of recognised transport services. The proper course for the Authority is to call for applications for the operation of services on the routes in question on a permanent basis and to grant permanent permits under section 58 for such period between 3 and 5 years as it may in its discretion decide. It will then be for the two appellant companies and such other companies or societies as may have been formed for the purposes to apply for such permits. The Authority should no longer concern itself with the formation of companies which is, as I have stated above, a function outside its proper sphere. With these remarks I reject both the appeals.
K.M.A Appeal rejected.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer