Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 623 2004 SLD 623 2004 CLD 868
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.708 of 2004, decision dated: 17-03-2004
MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, JUSTICE
M. Saleem Sahgal for Petitioner.

KOHAT CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE

VS

MONOPOLY CONTROL AUTHORITY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD

Law: Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970

Section: 19

Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance (V of 1970)--Ss. 19(1)(a), 21 & 24---Monopolies Control Authority (Supply of Information) Rules, 1995---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--- Constitutional petition---Monopolies Control Authority (Supply of Information) Rules, 1995, whether ultra vires of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices/ Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970---Powers, in the present case stood vested in Monopoly Control Authority under S.21 of Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970 to call for any information concerning the activities of' the undertaking and Monopolies Control Authority (Supply of Information) Rules, 1995 framed under S.24 of the Ordinance, only provided for the nature and form in which information was to be provided and Rules had been framed to carry out purpose of said Ordinance---Petitioner had contended that Monopolies Control Authority (Supply of Information) Rules, 1995 were ultra vires of Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970, but he had been unable to substantiate his claim.---Contention of petitioner was repelled and his Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine. ORDER According to this writ petition, the petitioner is an undertaking within the meaning of the Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices (Control and Prevention) Ordinance, 1970 and having assets in excess of Rs.300 million is required to furnish information as required by the respondent in exercise of its powers under the Monopoly Control Authority (Supply of Information) Rules, 1995. Some information was sought and was not supplied. As a result proceedings were undertaken against the petitioner and vide order dated 25-9-2001 a penalty of Rs.50,000 imposed under section 19(1)(a) of the said Ordinance. The petitioner was further called upon to pay the said amount by 8-11-2001 and also to provide the requisite information by the said date. This was not done and the matter was taken up on 4-2-2002 by the respondent and a penalty was imposed in the sum of Rs.10,000 per day from the date of default till…
🔒
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