OKARA BUS SERVICE Ltd. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SAHIWAL

Deputy Commissioner Sahiwal, on 30th October, 1972, addressed a letter to the Assistant Commissioner, Depalpur, which reads as follows:‑‑

"Further, to my telephonic discussion with you on the subject this is to confirm that Chief Secretary has desired that Bus Stand may be constructed at the Site proposed by the M.NA."

The petitioner has challenged this letter through this petition on the ground that it had a Bus Stand in the Town of Depalpur form were they were operating and that the order of the Chief Secretary or the Deputy Commissioner for the construction of new Bus stand was without lawful authority.

2. The reports of the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Regional Transport authority were called. It is one thing to say that the Bus Stand cannot be constructed at all and quite another that the Bus Stand cannot be operated unless there is proper permission grantee by the Regional Transport Authority under the Law. The Deputy Commissioner in his report, dated the 14th of December, 1972 stated: "The impugned order was with regard to the construction of bus stand while the R.T.A. has no business with regard to the construction R.TA. is only to grant licence of the bus stand after it is built up by the local body concerned according to the Motor Vehicles Rules". Secretary Regional Transport Authority, in his report dated the 16th of December, 1972, stated "Town Committee Depalpur has applied for the grant of `C' Class General Bus Stand, at Depalpur on the 2 land acres purchased by the Town Committee. The case for granting the licence to the Town Committee is still under consideration by the Authority and no final orders have yet been passed in this respect. The matter will be placed before the Authority after completing required formalities, in due. course." It is further stated "This Authority has not yet sanctioned any licence for Bus Stand as requested by the Town Committee, Depalpur. However, and section 80 Government or any Authority authorised in this behalf by Government may, in consultation with the. local authority having jurisdiction in the area concerned, determine places at which motor vehicles may stand either indefinitely or for a specified period of lime, and may determine the places at which public service vehicles may stop for a longer time than is necessary for taking up and setting down of passengers." It is also stated: "According to rule 253 the Regional Transport Authority may in consultation with the local authority having jurisdiction in the area concerned, make an order in the prescribed form permitting any place to be used as a stand and without such an order no place shall be so used. The present Bus Stand is classified as `D' but after grant of licence upto 31‑12‑58 the Okara Bus Service has applied for the renewal of his licence on S‑i2‑19G9, 3‑10‑1969,. 29‑8‑1970, and 3‑10‑1970. The licence was not renewed after 31‑12‑1958 although the Okara Bus Company was applying for the renewal on different dates,‑due to the reasons that Bus Company failed to submit N.O.C. asked for by this Authority and the Company continued to run this bus stand uptil now."

3. The position taken by the Deputy Commissioner and the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority is that the Bus Stand cannot be used unless the permission is g: anted for using it as such. If the Deputy Commissioner has ordered the construction of the Bus Stand, no objection can be taken to the same for the reason that there is no provision in the Motor Vehicles Rules which may require that no Bus Stand can be constructed without such permission. The fact, that the Bus Stand is constructed again by itself will not warrant that the R.TA. necessarily grant it a permit.

4. Learned Counsel contends that the Deputy Commissioner after he passed the impugned order permitting the construction of the Bus Stand further directed that petitioner be prohibited from the user of the Bus Stand which had been classified as `D' Class Stand and that the petitioner was compelled to use the new Stand. He however admits that at the present moment the petitioner is not being so compelled. Legal position is that unless the Regional Transport Authority grants permission to use the new stand, it cannot be used as such and also that there cannot be compulsion to its user at the moment.

5. The Deputy Commissioner and the Secretary R.T.A. had in their reports stated that the petitioner had been granted sanction of `D' Class Bus Stand but the licence has not been renewed after 1st of January, 1959 and that in the circumstances, the petitioner cannot use the Bus Stand. I do not feel inclined to go into this question in these proceedings for the reason that the petition merits to be dismissed on other ground viz., that the mere construction of the Bus stand does not furnish any cause of action to the petitioner.

6. I find no merits in this petition which is dismissed. No order as to costs.

M.Y.H./3990/L Writ refused.