HYDERABAD, March 14: The Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit bench, on Tuesday suspended an order of the district nazim banning entry of local buses into the city.

The court asked the additional advocate-general, Sindh, to file comments of the DCO, the DPO and transport authorities on a constitutional petition filed by Yousuf Ali.

The petitioner, who was represented by Dost Mohammad Serai advocate, is a representative of private bus owners association.

He said that he was plying his local bus since July 2000 as per proposed time schedule issued by the secretary of the RTA.

He said that around 300 buses were plying on different routes through valid and legal route but the district nazim without lawful authority and illegally constituted a committee consisting of two MPAs of the MQM which banned the entry of buses.

He said that no meeting of the district council was called and in absence of any resolution, the nazim disallowed entry of buses in the city on the ground it leads to traffic congestion.

He said that in fact chaotic traffic conditions were due to encroachments in the city.

He accused the nazim of violating the Motor Vehicle Ordinance with ulterior motives in order to direct committee to implement order regarding ban on buses.

He said that under the MVO only the PTA or the DRTA were competent to decide affairs of transport but the nazim forcibly and illegally tried to disallow buses’ movement with the help of the DPO.

He prayed the court to declare the order of the district nazim as illegal as it was issued without consent of parties, DRTA, PTA and the taluka council.

The AAG representing the Sindh government pointed out that pursuant to order, passed in civil revision no 137 of 2004 (district government v/s SRTC & others) it was directed by the court that all unlawful bus stops, used by inter-city bus owners within the limits of Hyderabad were dismantled forthwith and no inter-city bus was allowed to enter the city.

“Therefore, this impugned order is in consonance with direction recorded in civil revision”, he argued.

The petitioner’s counsel said that petitioners were not operating inter-city buses but were plying buses within the city thus they were not covered by the order.

It is therefore urged that impugned order is even otherwise violative of section 42(3) of the Sindh Local Government Ordinance 2001 as the RTA alone can not pass such order without complying with requirement of provision, referred above.

Respondents’ counsel Shamsuddin Sehto sought time to obtain instructions and file counter affidavit.

The court allowed time to exchange counter affidavit and rejoinder before next date of hearing.

It asked the counsel to file such affidavit at least three days before next date to enable petitioner to file rejoinder.