| Case ID |
37b72c70-f12a-4db1-b956-285cde8a49a6 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeals Nos. 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 59, |
| Decision Date |
Jul 21, 1958 |
| Hearing Date |
Jul 03, 1958 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan ruled that the High Court should not have entertained the writ petitions as the petitioners did not exhaust the statutory remedies available under the Motor Vehicles Act. It was determined that the Regional Transport Authority acted in an administrative capacity, and the decisions made regarding the permits were not subject to judicial review unless there was a clear lack of jurisdiction. The Court emphasized that where a statute provides a right and a remedy, parties must utilize the statutory remedy before seeking extraordinary relief through writs. The decision also highlighted the importance of procedural adherence and the distinction between administrative and quasi-judicial functions of the Regional Transport Authority. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of The Tariq Transport Company vs. The SargodhBhera Bus Service, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed critical issues regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court and the procedural requirements under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The case revolved around the appeals concerning the grant of stage carriage permits and the administrative powers of the Regional Transport Authority. The Court underscored that where a statutory framework exists, involving rights and remedies, it is imperative for the aggrieved parties to first seek recourse through the established statutory mechanisms before resorting to extraordinary measures such as writs. The ruling delineated the boundaries between administrative actions and judicial review, asserting that the Regional Transport Authority operates primarily in an administrative capacity, thus limiting the scope for judicial intervention unless jurisdictional errors are evident. This decision is pivotal for transport law in Pakistan, establishing precedence for the necessity of adhering to statutory remedies and clarifying the roles of various authorities within the transport sector. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
THE TARIQ TRANSPORT COMPANY,
THE SARGODHBHERA BUS SERVICE,
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, Lahore,
THE PROVINCIAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, Lahore
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C.J.,
M. SHAHABUDDIN,
A. R. CORNELIUS, JJ
|
| Lawyers |
Bashir Ahmad, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court,
Jamil Husain Rizvi, Advocate Supreme Court,
Muhammad Iqbal, Advocate, Supreme Court,
Saeed Akhtar, Attorney for Respondent No. 1,
Sadiq Ali Shah, P.C.S. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Lahore,
A. R. Sheikh, Advocate, Supreme Court,
Ata Ullah Sajjad, Advocate, Supreme Court,
Ghulam Abbas Jajfery, Advocate Supreme Court
|
| Petitioners |
THE TARIQ TRANSPORT COMPANY
|
| Respondents |
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, Lahore,
THE PROVINCIAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, Lahore,
THE SARGODHBHERA BUS SERVICE, SARGODHA
|
| Citations |
1958 SLD 360,
1958 PLD 437
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Husain Khan v. The Federation of Pakistan P L D 1956 Kar. 538,
Columbia System v. U: S. 316 U S 407,
Ex-parte Riddle 255 U S 450,
Matter of Tiffany 252 U S 32,
Ex-parte Part; Square Automobile Station 244 U S 412,
Ex parte Roe 234 U S 70,
King v. North (1927) 1 K B 491,
R. v. North (1927) 1 K C 491,
White v. Steel 12 C B (M S) 383,
Martin v Mackonochie 4 Q B D 697, 732,
Ex parte Smyth 3 Ad. & L 719
|
| Laws Involved |
Motor Vehicles Act, 1939,
Constitution of Pakistan
|
| Sections |
64,
57,
170
|