M/s R-SC Internet Services Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. vs Federation of pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi Ss — 2025 YLR 266 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2025 YLR 266 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court: Peshawar High Court
Year: 2025
Reporter: YLR
Parties: M/s R-SC Internet Services Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. vs Federation of pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi Ss
Subject matter: Constitutional
Provisions referred to: S. 282; S. 200; The Cantonments Act

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

Judgment text as reported

M/s R-SC Internet Services Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. VS Federation of pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi Ss. 200 & 282----Publicity fee---Fee on moving publicity, imposition of---Cantonment Board, powers of---Cantonment Board demanded the levy/fee from the petitioner (Internet Services Providing Company) against certain activities asserting that its (petitioner') motorcycle riders wearing jacket with petitioner's logo/ trademark are promoting its business which is mobile advertisement of petitioner/ company---Whether the said activities of the petitioner/ Company (wearing a jacket bearing logo/trademark of the petitioners/ company) can be subjected to the imposition of fee by the Cantonment Board---Held, that the Cantonment Board is the creation of a Statute i.e. The Cantonments Act, 1924 ('the Act, 1924') and S.282 of the Act, 1924 empowers the Cantonment Board to make bye-laws whereas S.200 of the Act, 1924 deals with the mandate of Cantonment Board to levy stallages, rent and fee---Perusal of the provisions of S.200 of the Act, 1924 shows that the Cantonment Board has a very limited mandate to charge fee and rent against the items which are specifically provided in S.200 of the Act, 1924---Activities of the petitioner/Company do not fall within any of the items provided in S.200 of the Act, 1924---Thus, the Cantonment Board at the relevant time had no authority to demand any levy/fee from the petitioner/ company against their activities---High Court declared the demand / challan illegal and without law full authority---Constitutional petition, was allowed accordingly.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANAbdul Malik VS State S. 497---Bail order---Observations of Court---Scope---Observations made in a bail order are tentative in nature and sam…
2025 YLR 1778 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSarwat Bibi VS Muhammad Idrees Kiani Double presumption of innocence---Scope---after acquittal, an accused carries double presumption of inn…
2025 YLR 451 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREEjaz Ahmed VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---If a single circumstance creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person, then…
2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 487 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Nadir Hussain VS State Benefit of doubt---Principle---Single doubt in…
2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHCitation Name: 2025 YLR 443 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Qutubuddin Jakhrani VS State Minor contradictions---Scope---Where in…
2025 YLR 2329 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMrs. Rehana Khatoon VS M/s Delsol the School S.15---Eviction petition---Maintain-ability---Landlord being represented through attorney---Eff…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English