| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 2025 2014 SLD 2025 2014 PLD 320 2015 CLD 25 (2014) 110 TAX 347 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.10702 of 2013, decision dated: 29-05-2013
MRS. AYESHA A. MALIK, J
Shahid Ikram Siddiqui for Petitioner. Usman Akram Sahi vice Munawar us Salarn for Applicant (in C.M. No. 3 of 2013). Waseem Abbas for Applicant (in C.M. No. 5 of 2013). Syed Moazzam Ali Shah for Applicant (in C.M.No. 1182 of 2013). Salman Akram Raja for
Writ Petition No.10702 of 2013, decision dated: 29-05-2013
MRS. AYESHA A. MALIK, J
Shahid Ikram Siddiqui for Petitioner. Usman Akram Sahi vice Munawar us Salarn for Applicant (in C.M. No. 3 of 2013). Waseem Abbas for Applicant (in C.M. No. 5 of 2013). Syed Moazzam Ali Shah for Applicant (in C.M.No. 1182 of 2013). Salman Akram Raja for
COLONY SUGAR MILLS LTD.
VS
GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: O.I,R.10(2)
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. I, R.10(2)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Import Policy Order, 2009, R. 20---Constitutional petition---Public interest litigation---Necessary and proper party---Scope---Impleadment of a party to such litigation---Principles---Petitioner filed a constitutional petition impugning the import of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from India through Wahga Border under R.20 of Import Policy Order, 2009 and contended that there were concerns with respect to storage facilities, testing laboratory and transportation facilities at Wahga Border; that Carbon Dioxide being imported from India was of substandard quality and would affect the public health and lives of citizens---Applicants contended that they should be impleaded as respondents to the constitutional petition on account of being necessary and proper party since all of them were users of Carbon Dioxide either as direct importers or purchasers or as consumers; that since their right with respect to permits given for import would be adjudicated upon in the constitutional petition, and that their rights could be seriously prejudiced---Validity---Constitutional petition in question was on a matter of public importance---For cases involving issues of public interest litigation, more liberal stance was needed to be taken by the courts for impleadment of parties to such litigation, to enable it to hear all the parties concerned, who were likely to be affected by any in such proceedings---When matters were of public importance then it was not only proper but necessary to make a person a party, whose interest was at stake in the constitutional petition and who could render proper assistance to the court about technical aspects of the issue involved---Application was accepted and applicants were allowed to join proceeding in the constitutional petition. 2014 SCMR 531 rel. ORDER C.M. Nos.3, 5, 1182, 1225, 1231 and 1241 of 2013. MRS. AYESHA A. MALIK, J.---Through this single order I intend to dispose of aforementioned six applications filed in the instant writ petition under Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C. wherein the applicants pray for their impleadment as respondents to the instant petition…
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