MUHAMMAD NASEEM CHAUDHRI, J.- Messrs Sunny Flying Coach Service, Burewala (petitioner) is operating a D-Class Stand, sanctioned by the Regional Transport Authority, Bahawalpur respondent No.2, at Chishtian and the wagon service is going on. On the request of the petitioner the Government of the Punjab, Services, General Administration and Information Department (Transport Cell) vide order dated 9.7.1986 has sanctioned halting points under Section 80 of the Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1965 at different places including Bahawalpur. The petitioner expressed that the wagon service in Bahawalpur was being operated from halting point at Multan Road opposite Shama Cinema since long and no complaint has ever been made before the respondents. However, the District Magistrate, Bahawalpur, the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Traffic), Traffic Sergeant Bahawalpur and the SHO Police Station Civil Lines Bahawalpur by applying underhand method and illegal practice such as stopping the vehicles on road unnecessarily in the scorching heat for the purpose of inspection of documents and directing the drivers to operate the wagon service from D-Class Stand at Chowk Fawara, Bahawalpur owned by some influential person (etc. Etc.) were interfering in his business even though he had always fulfilled all the requirements as well as terms and rules on the subject. He pleaded that he was being illegally harassed in order to favour the local transporters. He prayed for the proposed relief getting the respondents restrained not to harass him and not to interfere into the lawful use of the present legally-sanctioned halting point at Multan Road, opposite Shama Cinema, Bahawalpur in any manner whatsoever.
2. The comments were requisitioned from respondents Nos.2 to 4 and 6. In the comments respondents No.2 particularly took the following stand:-
(i) "Para. No. 3. No halting point can be used as starting and termination point as defined by the Government in the letter available at Annexures 'A' and 'B'.
(ii) Para. No.10. Neither any route permit was issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.2 nor the petitioner is-plying any service from the site mentioned by him in a writ petition. Thus the question for the shifting of his wagons to the Fountain Chowk does not arise. However, the wagons owned by individuals operating from the site mentioned by the writ petition were shifted to the General Bus Stand, Bahawalpur under the orders of Honourable High Court passed in W.P.Nos.862/1994 and 551/1995."
3. In their comments respondents Nos.3, 4 and 6 expressed that the writ petition was field without any cause of action against them.
4. I have heard the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the District Attorney and respondents who appeared personally before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Sunny Flying Coach Service was simply using the halting point and the relevant place was not being used as starting and termination point. He maintained that the petitioner was being vexed or ulterior motives. On the contray the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bahawalpur referred to letter dated 26.4.1992 and letter dated 3.5.1992 both issued by the Government of the Punjab, Transport Department according to which the halting point sanctioned under Section 80 of the Motor Vehicle Ordinance, 1965 cannot be operated for the starting of termination of a journey and that to put the pressure upon the administration the petitioner has invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court without any legal and factual justification. I agree with the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bahawalpur. The halting points of general nature cannot be used for the starting or termination of a journey. At a halting point of general nature all public service vehicles can stop for a very short duration just for the purpose of taking up and setting down passengers. Even though greed is a curse there is no end to it. The common scene/complaint is that the transporter(s) effect the overloading in the buses, misbehave with the passengers, make the over-charging, make the passengers to sit on the roofs and the halting points are considered/used by them as regular D-Class Stands where they stop the buses, wagons to the inconvenience of the public-at-large. Whenever the effort is made by the Administration to control such a situation in the larger interest of the citizens the transporter(s) make the hue and cry and some of them resort to the filing of the writ petition of the instant nature and obviously to put the pressure upon the Administration as the direction/order of every type which is issued/passed by the High Court has its effect of enormous importance. Even a direction issued by the High Court to the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority or the D.S.P. (Traffic) or other officers of the Administration that they shall proceed in accordance with law is misued. I am not going to accept the canvassing made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that only the halting point is used by the petitioner and even then he is harassed. Halting point is a place where the vehicles can stop for a very short duration, say one minute or so, just for the purpose of taking up and setting down passengers. However, many of the transporter(s) make the vehicles stand for considerable time which also becomes a cause of grumble for the other transporter(s) using the D-Class Stand or any other sanctioned stand. The wisdom behind this idea that the halting point of general nature is a place where all public service vehicles can stop for a very short duration just for the purpose of taking up and setting down passengers is that the person(s) who use the D-Class Stand or any other sanctioned Stand while acquiring some rights also make themselves liable to provide convenienes to the passengers which may be in the form of Sheds, Benches, Public Conveniences and Rest Rooms etc. My view is that this petition has been filed with some ulterior motive and obviously to put the pressure upon the Administration. The petitioner is not entitled to the discretion of this Court in any manner. He can use the halting place for the shortest possible time just for the purpose of taking up and setting down the passengers. In this regard no interference is being made. I, therefore, hold that this writ petition has no merit and there is no occasion to question the authority of the respondents.
5. For what has been said above, I dismiss this writ petition with costs in the sum of Rs. 2,000/- which may be recovered by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bahawalpur from the petitioner in accordance with law and in case of its recovery the same shall be deposited in the Government Treasury.