| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 973 2016 SLD 973 2016 CLC 792 |
Lahore High Court
I.C.A. No. 268 of 2015 in W.P. No. 8327 of 2015, decided on 10th June, 2015.
AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN AND MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, JJ
Sajjad Hussain Sipra for Appellant. Abdul Salam Alvi for
Respondent on watching brief.
I.C.A. No. 268 of 2015 in W.P. No. 8327 of 2015, decided on 10th June, 2015.
AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN AND MUHAMMAD SAJID MEHMOOD SETHI, JJ
Sajjad Hussain Sipra for Appellant. Abdul Salam Alvi for
Respondent on watching brief.
Malik NASIR MEHMOOD
VS
DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER and 3 others
Law:
Section:
Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)--- ----S. 3(2)---Intra-court appeal---Maintainability---If relevant law had provided the remedy of appeal review or revision then remedy of intra-court appeal was barred. Muhammad Aslam Sukhera v. Collector Land Acquisition, Lahore, Improvement Trust, Lahore and another PLD 2005 SC 45; Akbar Ali v. Additional I.G. Police and others 2011 YLR 2497; Muhammad Ameer Azam and 3 others v. Islamia University Bahawalpur and 5 others 2011 PLC (C.S.) 1227; Vice Chancellor, University of Health Sciences v. Breeha Zainab and others 2011 MLD 1652; Bashir Ahmad v. Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Multan through Chairman and 3 others 2013 PLC (C.S.) 752 and Dr. Kiran Qadir v. Maj. Dr. Muhammad Ali Yousaf Khan PLD 2014 Lah. 17 rel. ORDER Through this Intra Court Appeal, the appellant has assailed order dated 04.06.2015 passed by learned Single Judge in Chambers, whereby his writ petition was held to be not maintainable and without merit, with following observations:- ".. Admittedly, the petitioner has already filed a declaratory suit to establish his status, which is still pending and his application for temporary injunction was dismissed by the court below. Now, C.R. No.96/2015 has been filed by the petitioner before this Court. The petitioner may agitate his remedy before the appropriate forum. Moreover, he is also at liberty to participate in the open auction proceedings being carried out by the respondents and writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked merely on apprehension. Moreover, it is the prerogative of the respondents to run their business affairs according to their policy and it settled law that writ cannot be issued against policy matters. 4. Consequently, this writ petition is neither maintainable nor has any merit, which is accordingly dismissed in limine." 2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant is plying buses from Bay No.4 of General Bus Stand, Multan, but respondent No.4 has got issued proclamation in the newspaper for renting out the said Bay, for which he has no authority and the same would amount to bring monopoly of one Transport Company. Further contends that the fundamental rights of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492