Find a Lawyer

ARSHAD MEHMOOD versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB THROUGH SECRETARY, TRANSPORT CIVIL SECRETARIAT, LAHORE

Section A 69A [as inserted in Punjab Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Ordinance (XLVI of 1998)] Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 18, 8 and 25 franchise grant section 69A, Provincial Motor Vehicle The terms imposed under Section 69 of the Ordinance, 1965, are very strict, unfair. Discretion, coercion, and vice versa against the principles of natural justice, because if there is a possibility of adverse action against a person against his or her interest, he or she may, before finalizing such action. The right to a hearing is a right to vote on certain routes. Contrary to the provisions of Article 18 (b) of the Constitution, therefore, Article 8 of the Constitution is void. Section 69A is classified between franchise holders and appellant transporters, such classification is not permissible under Article 25 of the Constitution because the difference between the two classes is rational alliance with the object obtained by this classification. Must be, because such Ordinance also violates Article 25 of Article 69A, Section 69A of the Constitution is extremely stringent because of the Constitution of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court. The decisions were set aside, however, it was observed that it was the provincial government's proper implementation of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance 1965. There is no need to make amends, in the public interest and welfare, as per Article 8 of the Constitution, giving transporters the opportunity to do their business freely. Providing travelers with better travel facilities, through reliable stage carriage. That the government should operate transport on autonomous routes registration advocate from Digri lawyer