| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 498 2011 SLD 498 2011 PLD 120 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petitions Nos. 4396, 6158, 7760, 7320, 7321, 7577,7579, 4833, 5595, 7029, 7030, 5477, 5479, 7578, 4831, 6155,6223, 6222, 4834, 4398 and 7023 of 2010, decided on 18thMay, 2010
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J
Athar Minallah, Salam Akram Raja, Muhammad Bashir Mirza and Syed Shahab Qutub for Petitioners. Amir Rehman D.A.G., Ali Sibtain Fazli, Arshad Mehmood, Rashid Anwar and Kanwar Muhammad Usman Director, Minsitry of Textile, Hasham Ahmad and Nasar Ahmad for Re
Writ Petitions Nos. 4396, 6158, 7760, 7320, 7321, 7577,7579, 4833, 5595, 7029, 7030, 5477, 5479, 7578, 4831, 6155,6223, 6222, 4834, 4398 and 7023 of 2010, decided on 18thMay, 2010
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J
Athar Minallah, Salam Akram Raja, Muhammad Bashir Mirza and Syed Shahab Qutub for Petitioners. Amir Rehman D.A.G., Ali Sibtain Fazli, Arshad Mehmood, Rashid Anwar and Kanwar Muhammad Usman Director, Minsitry of Textile, Hasham Ahmad and Nasar Ahmad for Re
Messrs SHAHEEN COTTON MILLS, Lahore and anothersvsFEDERATION OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE through Secretary and another
Law: Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950
Section: 3(1),3
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 27A
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1956
Section: 12
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 3,18,25,38,199,19,28(e)
(a) Import and Export (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950)--- ----Ss. 3(1) & 5---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 3, 18, 25, 38 & 199---Constitutional petition---Notification of Federal Government restricting export of cotton yarn upto 35 million K.G., per month from 4-1-2010 till 30-6-2010---Petitioners being manufacturers and exporters of cotton yarn alleged such notification to be unreasonable and violative of Arts.18 & 25 of the Constitution--Validity---In absence of impugned restriction, there would be a flight of cotton yarn from country leaving value-added-textile sector starved of its raw material resulting into reduction of export earnings and wide spread closure of textile units and creation of unemployment---Only 8% of workers were employed in spinning industry, while remaining 92% were employed in value-added-textile sector---Policy of Government to impose impugned restriction was not arbitrary and unreasonable---Impugned notification was issued under Import and Export (Control) Act, 1950 and was not suffering from any uncertainty---Purpose of impugned notification was to secure availability of cotton yarn for local industry, while surplus fine yarn fetching higher price in international market was permitted to be exported---Right guaranteed by Art. 18 of the Constitution could not be interpreted by excluding or ignoring any other provisions thereof including Art. 38 casting responsibility upon State to secure well-being of its citizens and promote and protect employment---Right claimed by petitioner would necessarily be exercised in harmony with overriding needs and interest of community and State and its responsibilities under the Constitution---Petitioners could not claim to exercise right under Art.18 of the Constitution in a manner, which would result in a dramatic loss to export earnings further widening in trade deficit with all its attending adverse impacts on economy and resulting in increase unemployment---Interest of State and community could not be sacrificed for profits sought to be made by an individual at cost of great hardship to a significant segment of population--Impugned notification was not violative of Art.18 of the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492