KARACHI, April 5: The Sindh High Court restrained the Civil Aviation Authority on Wednesday from stopping public transport at old airport terminal No 1 on its way to and from Pehlwan Goth.

A transporter instituted a suit against the CAA complaining that mini-buses plying on route D-3 were not being allowed to enter terminal number one of the old airport on their way to and from Pehlwan Goth.

He said the route was duly sanctioned by the provincial and city district government authorities. The route was used not only by the general public but also by the CAA workers and employees of other concerns functioning in and around the airport building.

The plaintiff’s counsel, Shaukat Ali Shaikh, argued that the CAA had no authority under any law to regulate public transport or determine routes of public vehicles. He said he wrote to the CAA that the superior courts had consistently held that delineation and approval of routes was exclusively a function of the provincial and local transport authorities.

The lawyer submitted that the CAA cited ‘strategic’ reasons for interfering in the matter. It said the area had sensitive aviation installations the maintenance of which was CAA’s responsibility. But, the lawyer argued, that the old airport terminal was a commercial area and had also had educational institutions, besides banks. He cited an identical case in which the Malir Cantonment Board was barred from interfering with the public transport.

Earlier, the SHC gave similar decisions against other cantonment boards. The decisions were upheld by the Supreme Court.

Like the Malir Cantonment Board, the lawyer contended, the CAA wanted to operate the route under its own authority and thereby generate additional income.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah allowed the plea for an injunction against the CAA after hearing the counsel for the plaintiff and defendants.

Meanwhile, Justice Mushir Alam directed the provincial revenue board for land utilization to submit his reply to an applicant’s plea against wrongful exercise of authority.

The applicant submitted that he purchased 234 acres of land at Dadu belonging to M/s Al Amarat (Pvt) Company Limited, which went into liquidation in pursuance of an SHC order in 1990. The SHC official assignee invited and accepted bids for the company land in a public auction. Nobody, including the board of revenue, came forward to file any objection. The sale transaction was finalized and the liquidator executed a sale deed in favour of the purchaser in 2001.

However, the board of revenue woke up from its deep slumber in February 2006 and advertised through the press that the land in question was government property and that action was being initiated by it under Section 164 of the Land Revenue Act, the lawyer argued that the provision was not available for interfering the sale transaction as it dealt only with malpractices committed by the revenue board employees.

NOTICE TO AG: The judge also issued a notice to the attorney-general in a suit for damages against the owners of aircraft and its insurers. The plaintiffs, a Chinese woman and her minor son, sought to challenge the validity of the Carriage by Air Act, 1934, and a notification issued under it limiting the liability of an airline to Rs 39,500 only in case of the passenger’s death.