Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 1396 2011 SLD 1396 2011 PLD 805
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.683 of 2011, decided on 6th June, 2011. (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 18-5-2011 passed by Sindh High Court, Karachi in CP.D-1743-of 2009).
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., TARIQ PARVEZ AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

INDEPENDENT MUSIC GROUP SMC (PVT.) LTD and anothers

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others

Law:

Section:

Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance (.XIII of 2002)--- ----Ss. 19 & 22---Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2002, R.6---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4 & 185(3)---Petitioners, in the present case, applied for issuance of licence to establish and operate satellite T. V. Broadcast Channel Station under R.6 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Rules, 2002 for a period of 15 years i.e. period permissible to avail such licence---Said application remained pending and the Authority failed to decide the same within the period of 100 days as required under S.22 of the Ordinance and after passing of a considerable period, the Authority refused to grant licence due to "Security Clearance" not given by the Ministry of Interior---High Court under its constitutional jurisdiction, keeping in view the fact that petitioners had already suffered for a period of about four years, instead of remanding the case, might have issued a writ in the nature of mandamus---Authority was under obligation, both legally and morally, to issue licence to the petitioners because the reasons which prevailed upon the Authority for refusing to issue licence i.e. "Security Clearance" had not been accepted by the High Court in the impugned ---Petitioners, who on the basis of their application waited for a period more than 100 days, during which their application had not been rejected, had acquired a right that they should be dealt with in accordance with law as envisaged under Art.4 of the Constitution---Any excuse (now) made by the Authority was not acceptable for the reasons that earlier when rejection order was passed, no such demand was put forward calling upon the petitioners to fulfil the same or remove the objection, if any---Supreme Court observed that authorities who were required to discharge their functions under statutory provisions, kept the matter lingering on without any legal or constitutional justification---Supreme Court, in circumstances, converted the petition for leave to appeal into appeal and allowed the same with direction to the Authority to issue immediately licence to the petitioners, in terms of their…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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