' Brief facts of the case are that Zila Council Khanewal held open auction of cattle market on 9-8- 1996 to be held in the area of Kotla Jinda Ram for a period of 3. Years with effect from 15-8-1996 to 14-8-1999. Petitioner was the successful bidder. He paid the requisite dues to Zila Council, executed the agreement and work order was issued in his favour. The date for holding of the market was fixed as 1st and 14th of every month. Petitioner started holding the market. He invested huge amount and made it a successful market.
2. Respondent No,2 auctioned cattle market to be held on 1st and 14th of every month within the local limits of the municipal committee for a period of one year from 1-7-1997 to 30-6-1998.
Respondents Nos.3 and 4 were the successful bidders and hence they are contractors of respondent No,2. The distance according to the petitioner from Kotla Jinda Ram to Municipal Committee Mian Channu is only 15 miles and the days fixed for holding the market are also the same i,e,, 1st and 14th of every month.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Zila Council has the exclusive jurisdiction to set up the cattle markets in entire district, the establishment of cattle market by respondent No,2 is ultra vires of section 51 (xxxix-a) of the Local Government Ordinance, 1979, respondent No,2 has no right under the Ordinance to auction such a market and auction by respondent No,2 of the cattle market and running thereof by respondents Nos.3 and 4 is illegal.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents has also appeared at the preliminary stage. He has referred to subsection (3) of section 62 of the Local Government Ordinance to contend that respondent No,2 is justified to maintain and manage cattle market within its area. He has also referred to Mahboob Yar Khan and another v. Municipal Committee, Mian Channu and 2 others PLD 1975 Lah.
748 in support of his contention that the cattle fair means cattle market. He also submitted that the cattle market was established by Municipal Committee Mian Channu much before 17-1-1980 and as such is saved by section 106 of the Ordinance. The holding of cattle market by respondent No,2 and leasing it out to respondents Nos.3 and 4 does not suffer from any illegality.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. The relevant provisions of law need to be examined in this context are sections 51 (xxv), (xxxix-a), (xxxix-b), 62, 101 and 106 of the Local Government Ordinance, 1979.
' Section 51 reads as follows:---
51. Functions of Zila Council.--- A Zila Council may and if Government so directs shall undertake all or any of the following functions:--- A--Public Works.
(i) to (iv). Xxx B--Public Health.
(v) to (xii) xxx C--Education.
(xiii) to (xviii) xxx D--Agricultural Development and Economic Welfare.
(xix) to (xxiv) xxx ' Sub-clause (xxv) relates to the provision, regulation and maintenance of markets excluding private markets but including private cattle markets.
(xxvi) to (xxviii) xxx E--Articles of Food and Drink.
(xxix) xxx F---Drainage.
(xxx) xxx G-PublicFerries.
(xxxi) xxx H--Livestock and Dairy Development.
(xxxii) to (xxxix) xxx ' Sub-clauses (xxxix-a) and (xxxix-b) falls under this heading of the functions which provide as under:--- ("xxxix-a) holding of cattle fairs, shows and limits of its local area in accordance with the bye-laws: ' Provided that a Zila Council which had been hold cattle fairs, shows and markets in the limits of the local area of an urban local council in the district before 17th January, 1980 may continue holding such cattle shows, fairs and markets in accordance with the bye-laws.
' Provided further that a Zila Council shall not hold Baker Mandies for sale of cattle meant for slaughter in the limits of local area of an urban local council but may hold cattle fairs, shows and markets in such area even after 17th January, 1980 and in that case it shall pay to the concerned urban local council such share of the net income from cattle fairs, shows and markets as may be fixed by Government: ' Provided further that if an urban local council which had been hold in cattle shows and fairs before 17th January, 1980 within the limits of its local area, continues to hold the same, a Zila Council shall not hold cattle fairs, shows and markets within a radius of three miles of the limits of local area of that local council; and (xxxix-b) compulsory registration of sale of cattle and other animals at cattle fairs and markets."
' Section 62 of the Ordinance deals with private markets and reads as under:--- "62. Private Markets.---(1) No private market for the sale of articled of food or drink or animals shall be established or maintained within the local area of an urban local council except under a licence granted by the urban local council and in conformity with conditions of such licence.
(1-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1) or section 101 and subject to sections 51 and 106 no cattle market private or otherwise shall be held within the local area of an urban local council.
(2) An urban local council may levy fees in respect of private markets in the prescribed manner.
(3) An urban local council may, by notice, require the owner of any private market to construct such works, provide such conveniences and make such arrangements for the maintenance of the market, and within such period as may be specified in the notice."
' Section 101 provides as under:--- "101. Public markets.---(1) An urban local council may establish and maintain public markets or may provide places for use as public markets, for the sale of articles of food and drink and of animals and secure the proper management and sanction of such markets.
(2) An urban local council may in respect of public market, provide by bye-laws:---
(a) to (e)........................................................................... "
' Similarly section 106 deals with cattle shows, Zoo, etc. And is as under:--- "106. Cattle shows. Zoo, etc.---(1) An urban local council shall not hold cattle shows and fairs within the limits of its local area, but may hold baker mandies fpr sale of cattle meant for slaughter and charge such fee per cattle head sold as the bye-laws may provide: ' Provided that an urban local council which had been holding cattle shows and fairs before 17th January, 1980 within the limits of its local area may continue holding such cattle shows and fairs and charge such fee from the people attending such shows or fairs etc. As the bye-laws may provide.
(2) An urban local council may, with the previous approval of the Government, maintain or contribute towards the maintenance of zoological gardens.
' The abovesaid provisions of law came under the consideration of this Court earlier also in the case of Taj Din and 4 others v. Zila Council Kasur and 3 others PLD 1990 Lah.
269. A Division Bench of this Court held that the provisions contained in section 51 (xxxix-a) and (xxxix-b) are not to be read in isolation but as a whole and alongwith other provisions of the Ordinance. The subject-matter of both sections 51 and 62 having been clearly defined and there being no repugnancy between the two the maxim: Generalia speciali bus nonderogant, shall not apply. Section 51 would not prevail over the provisions of section 62 in so far as the rights of urban local council in regulating markets are concerned. Zila Council is empowered to hold cattle fairs/markets within the limits of urban local council whereas a municipal committee can regulate the setting up and maintenance of a private market under a licence and provision of section 51 does not create monopoly in Zila Council to establish cattle fairs/markets as subject of private markets has been specifically excluded from the functions of Zila Council. A perusal of clause (xxv) of section 51 of the Local Government Ordinance, 1979 would show that private markets have been specifically excluded from the functions which may be performed by the Zila Council thereunder.
The provisions contained in clauses (xxxix-a) and (xxxix-b) of section 51 are not to be read in isolation but as a whole and alongwith other relevant provisions of the Ordinance. Section 62 specifically deals with the subject, private markets which includes private cattle markets, which is self-contained enactment and does not in any manner control private individual to hold private markets in the limits of local council under a licence granted to him by the municipal committee under the aforesaid section. In these circumstances, it is not possible to hold that section 51 will prevail over section 62 in so far as the rights of urban local council in regulating the private markets are concerned. It is an established proposition that when the_ Legislature has made a special provision for a separate subject, the presumption is that the subsequent general enactment is not intended to interfere with the special provision unless it manifests that intention very clearly. Each enactment is to be construed in that respect according to its own subject-matter and its own terms. In the present case, subject of private markets has been specifically excluded from the functions of the Zila Council and, therefore, by no rule of interpretation, the provisions of section 62 are subordinate to the provisions of section 51. Both functions are clearly defined without any repugnancy between them. Zila Council is empowered to hold cattle fairs or markets within the limits of urban local council whereas a municipal committee can regulate the setting up and maintenance of a private market under a licence. The contention that the provisions as contained in section 51 of the Ordinance exclusively authorise Zila Council to establish cattle fairs/market is untenable. If such a contention is accepted then the provisions as contained in section 62 would become redundant. The subject of private markets has been specifically excluded from the functions of the Zila Council and there is no conflict between section 51 and section 62 of the Ordinance which operate independently. The aforesaid judgment of The High Court is a complete answer to the contentions of the petitioner regarding exclusive jurisdiction of the Zila Council of holding cattle markets in the entire district. Section 62 clearly authorises holding of private cattle market by the municipal committee under a licence to be issued by the committee itself. For the aforesaid reasons the contention of the petitioner is repelled.
6. The petitioner has not disputed the fact that respondent No,2 has been holding cattle market much prior to 17th January, 1980, as provided by section 106 of the Ordinance. Section 106 saves the holding of cattle shows and fairs by the urban local council prior to 17th January, 1980 by which they will continue such cattle shows and fairs in accordance with the bye-laws. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended in this respect that proviso to section 106 saves only the cattle shows and fairs, the words 'cattle market' have not been used therein which according to him was an intentional omission created to not permit urban local council to hold cattle market. This interpretation is not permissible. Lahore High Court has already held in its judgment reported in PLD 1975 Lah. 748 (supra) where a similar contention was raised and this Court while interpreting the word ' fair' used in section 187 of the Municipal Act of 1911 held that the word ' fair' is nonetheless a market. The term ' fair' used in section 187 was comprehensive enough to include market. It was further held that the Legislature while providing for section 187 in the Punjab Municipal Act intended it to comprise all categories of fairs including fairs held for the sale and purchase of articles of food and for the sale and purchase of livestock's and animals. After going through all the relevant provisions of the Municipal Administration Ordinance the Court has clearly held that the cattle fair means cattle market as well. The non-mention of cattle market in the proviso of section 106 of the Local Government Ordinance, 1979, in no way prohibits holding of cattle market by the urban local council. Cattle fair as interpreted in the aforesaid judgment means cattle market. It will be presumed that the words ' cattle market' were considered superfluous as the words cattle fair have been used in the proviso. On this account also the contention of the petitioner has no substance.
7. Overall perusal of section 51, clauses (xxv), (xxxix-a) and (xxxix-b), sections 62, 101 and 106 of the Local Government Ordinance as interpreted in the aforesaid judgments clearly establish that the urban local councils holding public cattle markets prior to 17th January, 1980, are authorised to continue to hold the same under proviso to section 106 and at the same time urban local councils have been permitted under section 62 to hold private markets under a licence issued by the council in conformity with the conditions of the licence.
8. The upshot of above discussion is that the auction of cattle market by respondent No,2 in favour of respondents Nos.3 and 4 is perfectly in accordance with law and calls for no interference. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
Writ .