Law: National Highway Authority Act, 1991

Section: 21(3),21(3)(vii),23,31,32

Law: National Highways and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998

Section: R.4,8,12

National Highway Authority Act (IV of 1991)--- ----Ss. 21(3), 23, 31 & 32---National Highway and Strategic Roads (Contrtol) Rules, 1998 [as amended in year 2002], Rr. 4, 8 & 12---Regulatory Framework and Standard Operating Procedures for Preservation and Commerical Use of Right of Way, 2002, Chap. IV---Approach Rental Charges (ARC), payment of---Vires of parent law---Effect---Right of way---Petitioners were charged Approach Rental Charges by Authority for businesses operating on National Highways and assailed that imposition of Approach Rental Charges was ultra vires mandate of National Highway Authority Act, 1991---Validity---Petitioners were using approach road of Authority within Right of Way/Between Rights of Way and building line in violation of restriction on ribbon development in respect of national highway/motorway/ strategic road---Petitioners were doing commercial activities without permission/obtaining NOC and paying Approch Rented Charges (ARC) under National Highway and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998---Petitiones were bound to get NOC from the Authority and pay ARC under National Highway and Strategic Roads (Contorl) Rules, 1998 and their undertaking in shape of demand draft in favour of the Authority for further process of NOC---Provisions of National Highway and Strategic Roads (Contorl) Rules, 1998 and Regulatory Framework and Standard Operating Procedures for Preservation and Commercial Use of Right of Way, 2002 were intra vires provisions of National Highway Authority Act, 1991 as well as the Constitution---High Court remitted matter to the Authority as some of petitioners claimed that they were not covered by National Highway and Strategic Roads (Contol) Rules, 1998 but still notices were issued to them demanding ARC while some alleged that demand was excessive and not in conformity with rules and regulations framed by the Authority itself---Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly. Khawaja Ahmad Hassaan v. Government of Punjab and others PLD 2004 SC 694=2005 SCMR 186; Suo Motu Case No.13 of 2009 PLD 2011 SC 619; Suo Motu Case No.11 of 2011 PLD 2014 SC 389; Hyderabad Cantonment Board v. Raj Kumar and others 2015 SCMR…

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