| Case ID |
31972499-949c-48d4-856f-1f9c35469ef7 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Constitutional Petitions Nos. 1060, 1062, 1071, 10 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 16, 1996 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court dismissed the petitions as the petitioners did not have a right to renew their licenses after their expiry. The licenses were issued for a specific period and the Railway Authorities had discretion in granting new licenses. The court referenced various legal principles indicating that the validity of actions or laws cannot be challenged based solely on public policy, and emphasized that the petitioners were not 'aggrieved parties' under Article 199 of the Constitution. Further, the court noted that the petitioners' claims for renewal lacked statutory backing and thus could not be upheld. |
| Summary |
In the case adjudicated by the Sindh High Court, the petitioners, who were vendors at railway stations in Sukkur District, challenged the non-renewal of their licenses by the Railway Authorities. The court examined the validity of such actions under the Constitution of Pakistan and relevant laws, emphasizing the discretionary power held by the authorities in issuing licenses. Despite the petitioners' claims of satisfactory service and compliance, the court ruled that the licenses were not automatically renewable and that the petitioners did not possess vested rights to renewal. The decision highlighted the principles of public policy and the limitations of judicial enforcement regarding administrative actions, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the petitions. This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to statutory guidelines and the discretionary authority of public functionaries in managing licensing agreements. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Nazim Hussain Siddiqui,
Abdul Hameed Dogar
|
| Lawyers |
Abdul Fattah Malik,
Ghulam Muhammad Khan Durrani,
A.M. Mobeen Khan,
David Lawrance,
Maqbool Ahmed Awan,
Manzar Alam,
Mehboob Illahi Malik
|
| Petitioners |
Shafiq Ahmed and others
|
| Respondents |
Federation of Pakistan and others
|
| Citations |
1997 SLD 680 = 1997 CLC 697
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Khan v. Alam Khan and others 1973 PCr.LJ 559,
Balwant Rai v. Union of India AIR 1968 All. 14,
Muhammad Saleem and others v. DCO and others 1994 MLD 295,
Shoukat Ali v. Secretary, Industries and Mineral Development, Government of Punjab, Lahore and 3 others 1995 MLD 123,
Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Rawalpindi v. Pakistan Mutual Insurance Company Ltd., Rawalpindi PLD 1991 SC 14,
Saiyyid Abul A'La Maudoodi v. Government of West Pakistan and another PLD 1964 SC 673,
Nazir Beg v. District Magistrate, Mardan and others PLD 1961 Lah. 142,
M.A. Naser v. Chairman, Pakistan Eastern Railways and others PLD 1965 SC 83,
Hafiz Muhammad Ishaq and 8 others v. Inspector-General Prisons Sindh and another PLD 1994 SC 733,
Ashraf Ali Akanda v. Abdul Awal, Deputy Magistrate and Special Officer (Aboriginal) Netrokona Camp and others PLD 1968 Dacca 962
|
| Laws Involved |
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
Art. 30,
Art. 199,
S. 52 of the Easements Act (V of 1882),
Arts. 4 & 199
|