ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Constt. Petition No.D-4372 of 2016

Date

               Order with signature of Judge

           

                           For orders on CMA No.1393/2017

29-11-2017

                      Mr. Mujahid Ali Shah, Advocate for the petitioners

                           Mr. Ghulam Abbas Akhtar, Advocate for respondents

                           Mr. Nisar Ahmed Abro DAG

-------------

12-09-2014

                                                 

               Through the instant constitution petition, the petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus with regard to the timings of trains 9-up/10-down Allama Iqbal Express and 17-up/18-down Millat Express at railway station Padidan.

               The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the present petition is in the interest of public at large and particularly those of nearby localities. It is further stated that discontinuation of the above named trains has caused immense hardship to people of the area. He further contends by referring to the averments of his petition, that resumption of such facility by respondents Pakistan Railways, will greatly benefit a large number of residents of the locality.

               In response the parawise comments have been filed by respondents Railways, wherein, inter alia, they have specifically stated that the afore named trains were allowed merely on trial basis for the period of only two months with effect from 22.8.2016 to 21.10.2016, but from the Padidan railway station, only few persons availed this facility; resultantly, respondents Pakistan Railways started incurring operation losses. Therefore, the plying of above named trains on trial basis was discontinued.

               After considering the arguments of the parties and perusal of their pleadings and record, we are of the view that every organization is entitled to frame and implement a viable policy for its business operation. The specific plea of operation loses as agitated by respondents could not be successfully rebutted by petitioners’ side, hence the said defence can not be overlooked, particularly, when such type of policy decision is not violative of any law.

               In view of the above, the instant petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

                                                                                                    JUDGE

                                                             JUDGE

Suleman Khan/PA