1. CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.--- The petitioner has filed this Constitutional petition with the following prayer:- it, is, therefore, respectfully prayed the that respondents may be directed to impose restriction on one -wheel riding on motorcycles and cycles in order to save the lives of the youngsters in the public interest."
2. The petitioner submits that on account of non- effecting measures by the respondents qua' one wheel riding, many of the precious lives of the young peoples are wasted, who have already been died as is evident from newspapers attached with the Constitutional petition consequently parents are deprived of their beloved children, who would be in a position to support their parents in their old days. He further submits that according to the mandate of the Constitution, it is the duty and obligation of the respondents to take measures so that the precious lives of the people be saved.
2. He further submits that suggestion of Zola Nazism is genuine and the Licensing Authority has to take action against the persons, who are driving their vehicles in violation of section 16(1) of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 and their licenses be cancelled. He further urges that the Police Authorities only register the cases against the persons, who are involved in one wheel driving under section 279 P.P.C, which is not effective measures:
3. The learned law officer submits that police authorities have already taken necessary action against the persons, who are using the vehicle inquestion as stated by the petitioner and registered 179 cases at different police stations of Lahore as is depicted from the report and paradise comments filed by. Respondent No. 3. He further submits that this Court has no jurisdiction to take the role of Legislature.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the petitioner and learned Addl.
3. Advocate-General and perused the record.
5. It is better and appropriate to reproduce para. 2 of the letter of Zola Nazism dated 29.12.2003 and reply of para. 5 of respondent No. 3 to resolve the controversy between the parties:- Para. 2 of letter dated 29.12.2003.
4. "It is pertinent of mention that one wheel driving comes within the ambit of "reckless driving on a public way" which is duly dealt with by the provision of Section 279 PPC, a cognizable offence.
5. Moreover, according to Section 16(1) of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 the Licensing Authority may disqualify the person from holding a license who uses a motor vehicle in the commission of a cognizable offence."
6. Para. 5 of respondent No. 3.
7. As submitted above, 179 cases have been registered at various Police Stations of Lahore District against the persons involved in one wheel driving. Moreover, all the Divisional SSP as well as SP/Traffic have been directed by the CCPO/Lahore to take effective measures to check this dangerous trend."
8. Respondent No. 3 has initiated action against the persons, who are involved in one wheel riding under Section 279 P.P.0 at different Police Stations of District Lahore and 179 cases have already been registered as is depicted from the reply of para. 5 of respondent No. 3. It is settled proposition of law th'at this Court has only jurisdiction to interpret the law and has no lawful authority to take the role of the Legislature as our Constitution is based on tracheotomy as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the following judgments:--- Zia-ur-Rehman's case (PLD 1973 SC 49)
9. Mian Nawaz Sharifs case (PLD 1993 SC 473)
10. It is also settled principle of law that is duty and obligation of the public functionaries to act in accordance with law as the Constitution is a binding contract between the four organs of the State, which are to the following effect:-
(i) Legislature;
(ii) Executive;
(iii) Judiciary; and
(iv) People of Pakistan.
11. This Court has ample jurisdiction to give directions to the public functionaries to act in accordance with law while exercising power under Article 199 of the Constitution in view of Article 4 of the Constitution as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the following judgment:- H.M. Rizvi and 5 others Vs. Maqsood Ahmad (PLD 1981 SC 612)
12. Province of Sindh through Chief Secretary Sindh, Karachi and 4 others Vs. GuI Muhammad Hajano.
13. (2003 S.C.M.R. 325)
14. It is also settled principle of law that mandate of Constitution is -binding on each and every organ mentioned above by virtue of Article 5(2) of the Constitution as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Ch. Zahoor cased (PLD 1975 SC 383). The suggestion of Zila Nazim mentioned above is in accordance with Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 and the Rules framed thereunder. It is better and appropriate to reproduce Sections 16 (1), (1A) and (2) to resolve the controversy between the parties:--- "16. Power of licensing Authority to disqualify for holding a licence:---
(1) It a Licensing Authority is satisfied after given him an opportunity of being heard that any person:---
(a) is a habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard, or
(b) is using or has used a motor vehicle in the commission of a cognizable offence, or
(c) has by his previous conduct as drive of a motor vehicle shown that his driving is likely to be attended with danger to the public.
15. It may, for reasons to the recorded in writing make an order disqualifying that person for a specified period for holding or obtaining a licence.
16. (1A) It a Licensing Authority is satisfied, after giving him an opportunity of being heard, that in respect of any person an order under subsection (1) of this section, or a declaration under sub- Section (1) of section 18, has been made on more than one occasion, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, make an order cancelling the licence granted to that person and disqualifying him for such period as it may deem fit.
(2) Upon the issue of any such order the person affected if he is the holder of licence, shall forthwith surrender his licence to the licensing Authority making the order, it the licence has not already been surrendered, and the Licensing Authority shall keep it until the disqualification has -expired or has been removed."
17. In this view of the matter, let a copy of the writ petition be sent to the Secretary Transport, Government of the Punjab, who is directed a give necessary directions to his subordinates to invoke Section 16(1) of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965, whosoever is not riding the vehicle in accordance with the prescribed modes specially the persons who are involved' in one wheel riding.
18. It is only possible in case there is coordination between the following authorities:-
(i) Secretary Transport;
(ii) Inspector-General of Police;
(iii) District Nazim.
19. The aforesaid authorities are directed to cooperate with each other and formulate a procedure to cooperate with each other. The moment the case is registered against any person then copy of the same shall be sent to the concerned Licensing Authority under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 and the Rules framed thereunder so that the effective measures shall be taken with cooperation of each other to save the lives of the innocent young peoples. It is pertinent to mention here that it is not only the duty of the public functionaries to stop such type of activities, it is also the duty of the parents to control their children. Who are responsible to provide funds to their children to purchase the motorcycles coupled with the fact that the purpose cannot be achieved without proper advertisement through the help of the media of all types, written as well as electronic.
6. Officer is directed to provide copy of this order to the Advocate-General Punjab, Dr. Danishwar Malik, Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan, Mr. Tariq Shamim, Standing Counsel, who are directed to use their good offices to pursue the matter so that the effective measures may be taken. The aforesaid Deputy Attorney General for Pakistan is also directed to send copy of this order to the Attorney General of Pakistan, who is also directed to use his good office so that effective measures may be taken by all the agencies in letter and spirit to save the lives of the young peoples who are the future of the nation keeping in view the mandate of the Constitution specially Chapter 2 fundamental rights, which is in fact flower of the Constitution as held by the Honourable Supreme Court in Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharifs case (supra). The aforesaid authorities are directed to formulate a policy preferably within two months and submit report to the Deputy Registrar Judicial of this Court within the stipulated period.
20. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. Copy Dasti on payment of usual charges. .