6
Under reference to items 6(b) and 6(p) of the Minute of the meeting of this Board held on 13 November 2025 and item 5(f) of the Minute of the meeting of this Board held on 29 October 2026, consideration was resumed of applications (a), (b) and (h) for grant of Private Hire Car Drivers’ Licences and there were submitted applications (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (i), (j), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), (q) and (r) for grant of Private Hire Car Drivers’ Licences. Applicants (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) had been asked to appear personally together with Police Scotland and applicant (h) had been asked to appear personally:-
(a) Blair Ardern
Mr Ardern, the applicant, joined the meeting together with Sergeant Craig on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted an objection, and a further objection received outwith the statutory timescale, to the application.
On hearing the reasons for the lateness of the further objection, the Convener proposed that the further objection be taken into account when the application was being considered. This was agreed unanimously. Mr Ardern did not object to the late objection being taken into account.
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Board adjourned to allow members to consider this application. The meeting was reconvened and the Convener proposed that the application be refused. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be refused.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11.30 am and resumed at 11.40 am.
(b) Faruk Ahmadi
Mr Ahmadi, the applicant, joined the meeting together with Sergeant Craig on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted an objection received outwith the statutory timescale to the application.
On hearing the reasons for the lateness of the objection, the Convener proposed that the objection be taken into account when the application was being considered. This was agreed unanimously. Mr Ahmadi did not object to the late objection being taken into account.
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Board adjourned to allow members to consider this application. The meeting was reconvened and the Convener proposed that the application be refused. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be refused.
(c) Naseerullah Seddiqui
Mr Seddiqui, the applicant, joined the meeting. Sergeant Craig remained in the meeting having not left after the previous item of business on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted a representation to the application. After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted until 16 May 2026. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted until 16 May 2026.
(d) Hafiz Aftab Ahmed
There was no appearance by or on behalf of Mr Ahmed, the applicant. Sergeant Craig remained in the meeting having not left after the previous item of business on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted a representation received outwith the statutory timescale to the application. The Convener proposed that the application be considered in Mr Ahmed’s absence. This was agreed unanimously.
On hearing the reasons for the lateness of the representation, the Convener proposed that the representation be taken into account when the application was being considered. This was agreed unanimously.
After consideration of all matters before the Board, Councillor N Graham, seconded by Councillor MacFarlane, moved that the application be refused. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be refused.
Sederunt
Councillor Steel left the meeting prior to the consideration of the following item of business.
(e) Paul Kaney
There was no appearance by or on behalf of Mr Kaney, the applicant. Sergeant Craig remained in the meeting having not left after the previous item of business on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted an objection received outwith the statutory timescale to the application together with a further letter, also received outwith the statutory timescale to the application. The Convener proposed that the application be considered in Mr Kaney’s absence. This was agreed unanimously.
On hearing the reasons for the lateness of the objection, the Convener proposed that the objection be taken into account when the application was being considered. This was agreed unanimously. The Managing Solicitor (Licensing) advised that the further letter, letter 2, contained details of matters which could only be considered if the interests of justice so required. On hearing further from Police Scotland, the Convener proposed that the interests of justice required that this further letter also be considered. This was agreed unanimously.
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Board adjourned to allow members to consider this application. The meeting was reconvened and the Convener proposed that the application be refused. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be refused.
(f) Merwais Qurashee
There was no appearance by or on behalf of Mr Quarashee, the applicant. Sergeant Craig remained in the meeting having not left after the previous item of business on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted an objection received outwith the statutory timescale to the application. Sergeant Craig requested that consideration of the application be continued to allow Police Scotland to submit additional information. The Convener proposed that consideration of the application be continued to allow Police Scotland to submit additional information and that the applicant be invited to a future meeting of the Board. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That consideration of the application be continued to allow Police Scotland to submit additional information and that the applicant be invited to a future meeting of the Board.
Sederunt
Councillor Steel rejoined the meeting prior to the consideration of the following item of business.
(g) Kawan Ahmadi
There was no appearance by or on behalf of Mr Ahmadi, the applicant. Sergeant Craig remained in the meeting having not left after the previous item of business on behalf of the Chief Constable who had submitted an objection received outwith the statutory timescale to the application. The Convener proposed that the application be considered in Mr Ahmadi’s absence. This was agreed unanimously.
On hearing the reasons for the lateness of the objection, the Convener proposed that the objection be taken into account when the application was being considered. This was agreed unanimously.
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Board adjourned to allow members to consider this application. The meeting was reconvened and the Convener proposed that the application be refused. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be refused.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 1.55 pm and resumed at 2.30 pm.
Sederunt
Councillor Hughes was not in attendance when the meeting resumed.
(h) Jakir Hossain
Mr Hossain, accompanied by his daughter, joined the meeting. After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(i) Samuel Dappa
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that consideration of the application be continued and that the applicant be invited to a future meeting of the Board. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That consideration of the application be continued and that the applicant be invited to a future meeting of the Board.
(j) Hamayoon Mohammadi
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(k) Abdo Alfarhan
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(l) Rene Alexis Mejia Morales
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(m) Yasser Obaied
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(n) Mohammed Yahya Hakim Muhammed
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(o) Sayed Gholam Reza Mohajer
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(p) Belal Naseri
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(q) Vinod Amminabhavi
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted for a period of one year. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted for a period of one year.
(r) Saiju Madathil Thekkethil Simon
After consideration of all matters before the Board, the Convener proposed that the application be granted until 14 May 2026. This was agreed unanimously.
DECIDED: That the application be granted until 14 May 2026.