ISLAMABAD, Oct 28: The Supreme Court on Thursday wondered as to why the Punjab transport minister was on tours in 1998 whenever summaries were moved to seek his approval for franchising the transport routes in the province.
The court asked the Advocate General Punjab, Shabbir Raza Rizvi, if the provincial transport minister was bypassed in the process of developing franchize transport system.
The larger bench comprising Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Rana Bhagwandas, Justice Syed Deedar Hussain Shah, Justice Hamid Ali Mirza, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani was hearing identical petitions challenging the ordinance relating to the Franchise Transport System in Punjab for being violative of the Constitution.
Mr Rizvi said the provincial minister was head of the committee that pursued the policy to franchise transport system in the province and that three summaries were subsequently moved in February, March and June in 1998 in this regard.
Relevant records and documents pertaining to the grant of routes to different companies in Punjab were also placed before the bench.
The larger bench is likely to conclude hearing on Friday after the advocate general completed his arguments on Wednesday, while the petitioners would submit replies to the points raised by the respondents.
Different petitioners from Lahore, Multan, Faisalabad and Rawalpindi including Mohammad Arshad, Mohammad Yunus, Mukhtar Ahmed, Zafar Iqbal and others had challenged the December 12, 2002 decision of the Rawalpindi Bench of the Lahore High Court, which had dismissed petitions against the franchise transport system.
The petitioners had pleaded that Section 69-A of the Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance, under which different routes were franchized to different transport companies, was violative of Articles 8 (laws inconsistent with, or in derogation of, fundamental rights to be void), 18 (freedom of trade, business or profession), 25 (equality of citizens) and 143 (inconsistency between federal and provincial laws) of the Constitution.
Rizvi also brushed aside the impression that agreement between the Varan Tours and the Regional Transport Authority (RTA) was signed before the insertion of Section 69-A in the Provincial Motor Vehicle Transport Ordinance.
The ordinance was promulgated in December 28, 1998 while the interim agreement was signed in May 28, 1999 and the final agreement was reached in February 28, 2000.
Despite successive attempts by the government to lure people to come forward and participate in the bidding for the franchize transport system, few people preferred to venture in, he explained. Even five foreign investors showed interest but later they backed out due to internal situation in the country, he said.
He also clarified that routes of different wagons and minibuses were cancelled after the franchizing of routes and not before finalization of the agreement.
Earlier, Aftab Gull advocate representing the Varan Tours told the court that Section 69-A was not hit by Article 18 of the Constitution.