| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1998 SLG 1390 1998 SLD 1390 1998 CLC 1666 |
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petitions Nos.672 and 707 of 1996 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No.685 of 1990, decision dated: 10-07-1997
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA AND MRS. KHALIDA RACHID, JJ
Muhammad Sardar Khan for Petitioners. Tallat Qayum Qureshi, Addl.. A.G. for the Provincial Government. Mian Mohibullah Kaka Khel for
Respondent No. 2. Mursaleen Khan for
Respondents Nos.2 and 3
Writ Petitions Nos.672 and 707 of 1996 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No.685 of 1990, decision dated: 10-07-1997
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA AND MRS. KHALIDA RACHID, JJ
Muhammad Sardar Khan for Petitioners. Tallat Qayum Qureshi, Addl.. A.G. for the Provincial Government. Mian Mohibullah Kaka Khel for
Respondent No. 2. Mursaleen Khan for
Respondents Nos.2 and 3
UNIVERSAL TOBACCO COMPANY, PAR HOTI, MARDAN through Manager and 9 others
VS
PAKISTAN TOBACCO BOARD and 3 others
Law:
Section:
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Arts.18 & 199---Tobacco Marketing Control Rules, 1993, R.6(3)--Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of---Petitioners in their Constitutional petitions had challenged Notification whereby sub-rule (3) was added to R.6 in Tobacco Marketing Control Rules, 1993 according to which petitioner companies and other purchasers were required to issue prescribed vouchers to growers of tobacco--Newly-added sub-rule (3) was challenged by petitioners alleging that it was unreasonable, unwarranted, unnecessary and impermissible and also violative of provisions of Art. 18 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--Basic purpose behind making impugned sub-rule (3) was to protect rights of the growers of tobacco, lest they were exploited in any manner by petitioners (tobacco companies) or by any other purchaser of tobacco---Respondent, Pakistan Tobacco Board, being fully authorised to control affairs to tobacco, had recommended to Governor for implementation of said sub-rule (3) and Governor being fully empowered to make rules had implemented sub-rule (3) in order to check genuine payments to growers and in order to protect larger interest of smaller growers who were always exploited---Implementation of sub-rule (3) in circumstances was fully permissible and, by no means, could be termed as unreasonable, unwarranted, unnecessary, impermissible and violative of provisions of Art.18 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as alleged by petitioner---Mere fact that newly-added sub-rule (3) would result in monetary burden to petitioners could not be pressed into service for challenging reasonableness of a law or rule imposed---Constitutional petitions filed by petitioners were dismissed in circumstances. Chintamanrao and another v. The State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1951 SC 118; State of Madras v. V.G.Row AIR 1952 SC 196; M/s. Dwaraka Prasad Laxmi Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1954 SC 224; Abdul Hakeem v. State of Behar AIR 1961 SC 448 and Anumati Sadhukhan v. Assistant Regional Controller AIR 1953 Cal. 187 ref. JUDGMENT SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA, J.---Universal Tobacco Company Par Hoti, Mardan and nine other such Companies, through Writ 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