Exercise of quasi-judicial powers: SC explains how adjudicatory body cannot be treated as aggrieved person

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled that an adjudicatory body deciding a matter in exercise of its quasi-judicial powers between two rival parties under a law cannot be treated as an aggrieved person if its decision is set aside or modified by a higher forum or Court under that law.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi ruled against the judgment of the Competition Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad.

K&N’s Foods (Pvt) Limited filed a complaint against A Rahim Foods (Pvt) Limited with the Competition Commission of Pakistan, asserting involvement of Rahim Foods in deceptive marketing practices in contravention of the provisions of Section 10 of the Act.

In the complaint, K&N’s Foods mainly alleged that Rahim Foods was copying the K&N’s Foods product labelling and packaging for the sale of its several frozen and processed meat products. It also alleged copying of its trademark term “Combo Wings” by Rahim Foods for one of the products, that is, the chicken wings.

The Commission initiated proceedings against Rahim Food under Section 30 of the Act, and imposed Rs10 million for the contravention of Section 10(1) read with Section 10 (2) of the Act and Rs10 million for the contravention of Section 10(1) read with Section 10 (2) (d) of the Act.

Rahim Foods appealed the order of the Commission before the Competition Appellate Tribunal, under Section 42 of the Act. The Tribunal affirmed the findings of the Commission that Rahim Foods had used the K&N’s Foods product labelling and packaging in a deceptive marketing manner. It; however, set aside the order of the Commission with regard to imposing a penalty for the contravention of Section 10(2) (a) of the Act.

Rahim Foods and the Commission filed these appeals against the impugned judgment under Section 44 of the Act.

The court noted that K&N’s Foods, which may have been aggrieved of the decision of the Tribunal on the point of non-applicability of the provisions of Section 10(2) (a) of the Competition Act 2010, has not impugned the decision of the Tribunal by preferring an appeal to this Court, and it is the Commission that has challenged the decision of the Tribunal on that point by filing the appeal.

The court observed that though the role of the Commission under the Act is primarily of a regulatory body, it is quasi-judicial, as well, under some provisions of the Act. “The provisions of clauses (a) and (d) of Section 10(2) of the Act, in our view, envisage the quasi-judicial role of the Commission while deciding upon the divergent claims and allegations of two competing undertakings.”

The judgment said that this Court in Wafaqi Mohtasib case, held that an adjudicatory body deciding a matter in exercise of its quasi-judicial powers between two rival parties under a law cannot be treated as an aggrieved person if its decision is set aside or modified by a higher forum under that law or by a court of competent jurisdiction and such body thus does not have locus standi to challenge the decision of that higher forum or court.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023