BILAL-UR-REHMAN vs EXCISE AND TAXATION MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AUTHORITY S — 2026 CLC 990 ISLAMABAD

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

BILAL-UR-REHMAN VS EXCISE AND TAXATION MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AUTHORITY S. 21---Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance (XIX of 1965), Ss.35, 43 & 115---Islamabad Capital Territory (Seizure and Disposal of Motor Vehicles) Rules, 2014, Rr. 2, 3, 7 & 8---Islamabad Capital Territory (Administration) Order, 1980 (P.O. No. 18 of 1980), Art.2---Vehicle ownership transfer---Suspicious chassis number---Confiscation of vehicle---Confiscation order set aside in revision---Recall of revisional order by same authority---Review/recall jurisdiction in absence of express statutory power---Whether the Director General, having exercised revisional jurisdiction, could lawfully review/recall his own order in the absence of an express statutory power by invoking S.21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897?---Held: If the order was administrative or executive, the authority issuing it could ordinarily exercise the power of modification or recall under S.21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, subject to the conditions prescribed by statute---Conversely, where the order was judicial or quasi-judicial and determined the rights and liabilities of the parties after an adjudicatory process, the authority became functus officio upon pronouncing the order and such an order could not be recalled or modified---Order of Motor Registration Authority was first subject to scrutiny before the Director in appeal and thereafter open to examination by the Director General in revision---This hierarchy of remedies indicated the legislative intent to subject the original order to judicial scrutiny through designated forums rather than permitting its reconsideration by the same authority which passed it---Presence of the said remedies under the law strongly indicated that the order passed by the Motor Registration Authority was not administrative but quasi-judicial in nature---By entertaining the review petition and recalling the revisional order, the Director General effectively assumed jurisdiction not vested in him by law---Impugned order was set aside---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

BILAL-UR-REHMAN vs EXCISE AND TAXATION MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION AUTHORITY S — 2026 CLC 990 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLC