Case Details

Citation(s)
1970 SLG 3251 1970 SLD 3251 = 1970 PLD 775
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 978 of 1968, decided on 4th July 1969.
Presented By: Mushtaq Hussain and Shameem Hussain Kadri, JJ
M. Saleem Chaudhry for Petitioner. Dr. Javid Iqbal for
Respondent No. 3.

MESSRS LYALLPUR-SAHIWAL BUS SERVICE (RECD.), LAHORE-Petitioner

VERSUS

APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 98

  (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98(2)(a)(ii)---Juris diction of High Court under Art. 98---Scope---Member, Board of Revenue, entertaining time-barred appeal against order of Regional Transport Authority and after overruling objection on score of limitation, proceeding to dispose of such appeal-Held, order thus passed, howsoever wrong, cannot be said to be without lawful autho rity so as to attract jurisdiction under Art. 98. Article 98(2)(a)(ii) of the Constitution confers jurisdiction upon the High Court to declare that any act, done in the Province by a person performing function in connection, inter alia, with the affairs of the Province, has been done or taken without lawful authority and is of no legal effect. If, therefore, it is found that the act has been done by a person who had the authority to do it, the High Court would not have the jurisdiction to interfere with it in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 98 howsoever profoundly it differs with the conclusions arrived at by such person. In the instant case, the respondent filed an appeal before the Board of Revenue against the order of the Regional Transport Authority rejecting his claim to the grant of a permit. The period of limitation prescribed for filing such appeals under section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Ordinance is thirty days. Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable. Although the appeal was allegedly barred by time and although an objection was raised on this score, the appeal of respondent was accepted and the objection on the score of limitation was overruled. The result was that the route-permit granted to the petitioner was cancelled and the same was granted to respondent. In writ petition it was urged that since the appeal was barred by time, the Member, Board of Revenue, had no authority under the law to accept it and to deprive the petitioner of his permit Held: there is, no lack of authority against the proposition The Member Board of Revenue, who had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an order of the Regional Transport Authority did not only entertain it but proceeded to dispose it of after repelling the objection on the score of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register