Find a Lawyer

Appeal No. 329 of 1961‑62, decided on 12th November 1962, District Lahore.

Ss. 62 & 44(3) (b) P.T.A. can perform duties in respect of inter‑regional route.

-------

--‑Question whether temporary permit‑holder is not complying with condition attached to permit to be determined by P. T. A.

Iqbal Ahmad Siddiqui for Appellant.

Ijaz Nasarullah Khan for Respondent No. 2.

Secretary, P. T. A. in person.

This transport appeal has been preferred against an order of the P. T. A. which issued a temporary permit to the respondent (Shamshad Transport Co.), to ply between Lahore and Mangla Dam in order to meet a temporary need. The order was thus passed under section 62 of the Motor Vehicles Act read with the provisions of section 44 (3) (b). The latter provision runs as follows :‑

The P. T. A. shall exercise and discharge through the Pro vince the following powers and functions, namely

(a) -----------------------------------------------

(b) To perform the duties of the R. T. A. where there is no such authority and if it thinks fit or if so required by a R. T. A. to perform those duties in respect of any route common to two or more regions.

The appellant's contention is that where an R. T. A. exists the P. T. A. cannot exercise the powers of an R. T. A. unless it is so required by the R. T. A. in respect of an inter‑regional route. This interpretation to my mind is not justified by the provisions of this subsection which authorises a P. T. A. to perform those duties in respect of an inter‑regional route if it thinks fit. This would also be in keeping with the supervisory and directive powers which the Provincial Transport Authority has been given in the Act over the Regional Authorities.

The second argument which has been advanced is that this need is not temporary in character and is likely to continue over a period of time. The need apparently has arisen because a big dam is under construction at Mangla, and there is no doubt that the need for a direct service between Lahore and Mangla does exist. The P. T. A. has met this need temporarily. I have been assured that they are inviting applications for granting permanent permits for this route and in doing so the application which has already been made by the appellant company to the R. T. A., Rawalpindi will also be duly considered.

The third point which has been urged is that the condition which were attached to the temporary permit granted to the respondent company are not being complied with. The proper remedy in this behalf for the appellant would be to make an application to the P. T. A. requesting them to see that the conditions on which the permit has been granted are observed by the appellant company and on their failure to do so take appro priate action. It is not the function of the appellate authority at this stage to intervene in this matter.

As a result of the above discussion and the assurance which has been given on behalf of the P. T. A. that in granting permanent permits in future on this route, they will observe the procedure laid down in the Act, I would dismiss this appeal.

K. M. A. Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.