| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1292 2019 SLD 1292 2019 SCMR 924 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 1247 of 2016, decision and hearing Dated: 02-04-2019. (Against the judgment Dated 19.02.2016 of the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad passed in F.A.O. No. 34 of 2012)
MUSHIR ALAM, JUSTICE QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mian Shafaqat Jan, Advocate Supreme Court, Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record and Khurram Siddiqui, Director Law, PTA
Respondent(s) by: Azid Nafees, Advocate Supreme Court
Civil Petition No. 1247 of 2016, decision and hearing Dated: 02-04-2019. (Against the judgment Dated 19.02.2016 of the Islamabad High Court, Islamabad passed in F.A.O. No. 34 of 2012)
MUSHIR ALAM, JUSTICE QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Mian Shafaqat Jan, Advocate Supreme Court, Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record and Khurram Siddiqui, Director Law, PTA
Respondent(s) by: Azid Nafees, Advocate Supreme Court
PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY, PTA HEADQUARTERS, ISLAMABAD
VS
PAKISTAN MOBILE COMMUNICATION LIMITED
Law: Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act, 1996
Section: 3,7(1),7(2)
Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act (XVI of 1996)--- ----Ss. 7(1) & 7(2)---Cellular Mobile Network Quality of Service (QoS) Regulations, 2011, Regln. 10(1)---Appeal against "decision or order" of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority ('the Authority') before the High Court---Scope---Cellular mobile services company ('cellular company')---Quality of service (QoS) survey carried out by Pakistan Telecommunication Authority ('the Authority')---After the QoS survey results were compiled the Authority issued a show cause notice to the cellular company as its quality of service was below standards---Instead of replying to these show cause notices the cellular company filed an appeal before the Authority under S. 7(2) of the Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act, 1996 ('the Act') contending that the QoS survey was conducted without jurisdiction and therefore the show cause notices issued subsequent to the survey were also without jurisdiction---Appeal filed under S. 7(2) of the Act was dismissed on the grounds that Act and Cellular Mobile Network Quality of Service (QoS) Regulations, 2011 ('the Regulations') mandated the monitoring of services provided by licensees and specifically provided for conducting surveys and that the survey was conducted pursuant to the direction of the Authority therefore it was not a "decision or order" of an officer of the Authority which could be challenged under S. 7(2) of the Act---Cellular company assailed the decision of the Authority by filing an appeal under S. 7(1) of the Act before the High Court, which allowed the appeal and directed the Authority to conduct a new QoS survey---Held, that decision of the Authority was in accordance with S. 7(2) of the Act---Appeal preferred by the cellular company before the High Court was incompetent as there was no decision or order of the Authority; there was also no decision on the show cause notices---High Court could not suspend or strike down the said show cause notices in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under S. 7(1) of the Act---High Court's appellate jurisdiction under the Act commenced once there was a decision or order, however, there wasn't any in…
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