' SHAHID JAMIL KHAN, J. --- Order dated 21.04.2014 is challenged, whereby license of the petitioner as letter writer was revoked by respondent No, 1.
2. It is contended, inter alia, that the impugned letter was revoked, on a complaint, without providing an opportunity of being heard.
3. Learned Standing Counsel submits that no right was conferred by license granting . Letter dated 18.08.2001. He explains that license is a privilege and not a right, which could be revoked at any time without giving any reason. He has relied upon the judgment by apex Court in M.A. Naser v.
Chairman, Pakistan Eastern Railways and others (PLD 1965 S.C. 83) and Messrs Noorani Traders, Karachi through Managing Partner v. Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority through Airport Manager, Karachi (PLD 2002 Karachi 83).
4. Both the parties have levelled allegations against each other. Mrs. Ansa Naureen, DSPO, Jhelum, speaking for the respondents, submits that the petitioner has created embarrassment for the Office of Postmaster General at Dina and is blackmailing through press and by fixing banners etc. Few press clippings are attached with the comments filed by the respondents.
' Conversely, the petitioner has claimed that respondents are asking for illegal gratification for continuation of the license.
5. Heard both the parties and record perused.
6. The contents of the license granting letter dated 18.08.2001 are reproduced hereunder:- "Mr. Lftikhar Ahmad Mughal S/o Jalal Din resident of Domeli Mohallah Dina Teh. & Distt. Jhelum is hereby allowed to sit outside post office premises of Dina (HSG) Post Office to work as professional letter writer with immediate effect and till further orders.
' The license fee Rs, 10/- will be got credited at Dina for each month by' the Postmaster Dina and will inform the credit particulars under the head U/R."
' The petitioner is simply allowed to sit outside the post office and work as a professional letter writer, till further orders. However, the letter of termination dated 21.04.2014 shows that the license was revoked due to some complaint against the petitioner. The petitioner has himself admitted that he was sitting within boundary of the post office and has attempted to justify that all letter writers are sitting within the boundary.
7. Before discussing right of petitioner under the license in question, it seems important to examine background of the license being given to 'professional letter writers'. The purpose of the license; initially was to facilitate illiterate persons, who intended to convey their messages through post.
This phenomenon has lost its efficacy with afflux of time. Yet licenses in the name of professional letter writers are continuing. It appears that licensees, like petitioner, have also established some business within or outside the premises of post offices, in garb of the license. After advancement, particularly in urban areas, hardly any persons would come to get a letter or massage written through any professional letter writer. However, the office of Post Master General is still extending this concession in favour of persons doing other business. Such letter writers are now powerfully exploiting the situation, apparently in connivance with the officials of the post office.
8. To understand the concept of license, its statutory force is required to be examined. License; its grant/ revocation and rights/duties of the licensor/licensee are governed in Chapter-VI of the Easements Act, 1882. License is defined under Section 52 in the following words:- "52. "License" defined: Where one person grants to another, or to a definite number of other persons, a right to do, or continue to do, in or upon the immovable property of the grantor, something which would, in the absence of such right be unlawful, and such right does not amount to an easement or an interest in the property, the right is called a license."
' In simple words license is 'a permission by grantor to do something in immoveable property of grantor/licensor, which in absence of such permission would be unlawful. Under Section 53; licenese is transfer of an interest in immovable property; which may be granted expressly or by implication under Section 54. Under Section 60 license is always revocable, except when grant is coupled with transfer of property or licensee has executed a work of permanent character by incurring expenses. Some instances under which the license shall be deemed revoked are provided in Section 62. Section 60, having direct bearing on the case is reproduced:--- "60. License when revocable: A license may be revoked by the grant a unless-
(a) it is coupled with a transfer of property and such transfer is in force;
(b) the licensee, acting upon' the license, has executed a work of a permanent character and incurred expenses in the execution."
9. When licensee is evicted on revocation of license, like the petitioner, rights are provided kinder Section,, 63 and 64; provisions of which are reproduced:- "63 Licensee's rights on revocation: Where a license is revoked, the liceniee is entitled to a reasonable time to leave the property affected thereby and to remove any goods which he has been allowed to place on such property".
"64 Licensee's rights on eviction;_. Where a license has been granted for a consideration, and the licensee, without any fault of his own, is evicted by the grantor before he, has fully enjoyed, under the license, the right for which he contracted, he is entitled to recover compensation from the grantor."
' Under the reproduced provisions, licensee on revocation of license is entitled to reasonable"' time to remove things allowed to be placed on the property. In case, license is granted against consideration and licensee is derived from enjoying fully under the license, for no fault on his part, he is entitled to recover compensation from the licensor/grantor.
10. Under facts of this case, as ascertained from pleadings and arguments; the petitioner was granted license against consideration of Rs, 100/-. Nevertheless, it is an unresolved dispute whether it was revoked for any fault on the part of petitioner. This dispute on facts cannot be resolved in Constitutional jurisdiction. It is a settled law that disputed facts; determination of which requires factual inquiry by leading evidence, cannot be resolved in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, as is held by apex Court in Fida Hussain and another v. Mst. Saiqa and others (2011 SCM R 1990).
11. Contents of the letter granting license (supra), show that it was a permission/privilege, to sit outside post office premises to work as professional letter writer'. Since the license was not coupled with any transfer of property nor petitioner was allowed to execute a work of permanent character by incurring expenses, therefore, it was revocable under Section 60. Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in M. A. Naser case (supra) has held, "Such a right does not amount to easement as defined in Section 4 of Easements Act, 1882 or an interest in the property. Nor can it be regarded as a license 'coupled with a transfer of property' within the meaning of Section 60 of the' Easements Act." The Hon'ble Court further held that no injunction can be granted against revocation of such license, relevant part is reproduced for better understanding:--- "In a case like this the licensee is entitled to a reasonable notice in accordance with the provisions of Section 63 of the 'Easements Act. If however, the licence is revoked without reasonable notice the remedy of the licensee is by way of damages and not by way of an injunction.
' It may also be pointed out that as this contract cannot he specifically enforced, clause (f) of Section 56 of the Specific Relief Act will operate as a bar to the grant of injunction."
12. In light of the discussion (ibid) contention of learned counsel for the petitioner of providing opportunity of being heard has no force. However, the petitioner may approach a Court of competent jurisdiction for compensation if it is proved that he was evicted for no fault on his part.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed
13. Office shall send a copy of this order to Post Master General of Pakistan, who is directed to look into the matter and review the rules/policy of issuing such license, which are being misused, and take appropriate steps, under intimation to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.