TULIP PROJECT, RIVERSIDE through Chief Executive vs NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY through CHAIRMAN S

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

TULIP PROJECT, RIVERSIDE through Chief Executive VS NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY through CHAIRMAN S. 10(2)(ix)---National Highways and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998 [as amended in 2002], Rr. 3(i)(ii)(iii)(iv), 6(2) & 8---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Right of way---Charges, demanding of---Raising of new construction---Petitioner company was aggrieved with demand of payment raised by National Highway Authority---Plea raised by National Highway Authority was that additional amenities constructed in already running business place were in violation of S.10(2)(ix) of National Highway Authority Act, 1991, read with R. 3(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) of National Highways and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998 as amended in 2002---Demand raised by National Highway Authority was not legally valid as alleged construction or new businesses in already constructed building structure or non-structured concept was beyond building line---Authorities conceded that building line concept under law was developed to provide safety and security to pedestrian and people who were within that area from any untoward incident/accident from highways and for no other purpose---Provision of R.6(2) of National Highways and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998 [as amended in 2002] prohibited to construct or maintain any structure or to make any excavation between building line and right of way but R.8 of National Highways and Strategic Roads (Control) Rules, 1998 [as amended in 2002] provided power to the Authority subject to due consideration to highway safety and convenience of road user and if satisfied could grant permission to construct means of access to, or from, highway or to construct building, structure and other amenities within building line subject to such conditions as it could deem fit to impose on payment of such fee so fixed---Such discretion to National Highway Authority for grant of permission to raise construction or amenities within building line was based upon single criterion i.e. highway safety and convenience of road user, which was already in favour of petitioner company, as no adverse report or refusal was available on record to the extent of new amenities raised by petitioner within his own land---High Court set aside actions/demand for additional amenities claimed by National Highway Authority including decision passed by National Highway Authority by applying Consumer Price Index and calculation of any amount, in such type of facilities under the garb of amenities access, road network or NOC fee or approach rentals---High Court directed National Highway Authority to first draft their regulations in accordance with law before raising any demand---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

TULIP PROJECT, RIVERSIDE through Chief Executive vs NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY through CHAIRMAN S — 2022 PLD 314 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD