Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 1968 2017 SLD 1968 2017 CLC 776
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No. 73 of 2006, decision Date : 26-03-2013, hearing Date : 25-03-2013 On appeal from the judgment of the High Court Dated 10.6.2005 in Writ Petition No. 67 of 2003
CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, JUSTICE, RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, JUSTICE
Khalid Rashid Chaudhary, Advocate for Appellants. Farooq Hussain Kashmiri, Advocate for
Respondents.

CH. ALLAH DITTA

VS

MUHAMMAD AZEEM BHATTI & 15 OTHERS

Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974

Section: 44

Azad Jammu and Kashmir Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1971--- ----Ss. 48, 53 & 66---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S. 44---Writ petition---Maintainability---Minister for transport---Issuance of route permits for motor vehicles---Delegation of powers---Nature and scope---Contract carriage---Minister for transport had issued route permits which were cancelled by the High Court---Validity---Delegatee could not go beyond the powers delegated to him nor the delegator could delegate the powers which were not vested in him---Minister for transport was delegated the powers of government vested in it under S.50(1) of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1971---Minister while exercising said powers was only authorized to order the Transport Authority for introduction of new routes or any number of additional permits for existing route of stage carriage and granting the same to any particular party or parties---Minister for transport could not directly sanction the route permits himself or grant sanction for contract carriage permits---Neither the provision of S.50 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1971 dealt with the matter of contract carriage permits nor any powers with regard to contract carriage permits had been delegated to the Minister---Section 50 of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1971 dealt with the matter of stage carriage permits---Route permits issued were not of stage carriage but were of contract carriage---Minister for transport had granted contract carriage permits but powers delegated to him were with regard to stage carriage---Minister for transport had nothing to do with contract carriage route permits---Said routs permits issued were without lawful authority---Petitioners had no alternate, efficacious or adequate remedy---No order, proceedings or any act of the Provincial or Regional Transport Authority was called in question---Controversy in the present case was with regard to the notifications issued by the Minister for transport who was neither Provincial nor Regional Transport Authority---Only remedy available to the petitioners was to approach the High Court for…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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