AGL 39.50 Increased By ▲ 1.78 (4.72%)
AIRLINK 177.35 Increased By ▲ 8.70 (5.16%)
BOP 10.09 Increased By ▲ 1.00 (11%)
CNERGY 6.85 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
DCL 9.91 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.39%)
DFML 43.25 Increased By ▲ 2.61 (6.42%)
DGKC 98.65 Increased By ▲ 5.41 (5.8%)
FCCL 39.15 Increased By ▲ 1.23 (3.24%)
FFBL 82.49 Increased By ▲ 3.77 (4.79%)
FFL 14.39 Increased By ▲ 0.93 (6.91%)
HUBC 121.52 Increased By ▲ 7.42 (6.5%)
HUMNL 15.30 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (2.34%)
KEL 5.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.87%)
KOSM 8.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.97%)
MLCF 48.21 Increased By ▲ 2.72 (5.98%)
NBP 75.50 Increased By ▲ 0.58 (0.77%)
OGDC 197.75 Increased By ▲ 4.82 (2.5%)
PAEL 32.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.28%)
PIBTL 8.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.42 (-4.9%)
PPL 177.05 Increased By ▲ 9.67 (5.78%)
PRL 34.11 Increased By ▲ 3.10 (10%)
PTC 22.60 Increased By ▲ 0.52 (2.36%)
SEARL 103.00 Increased By ▲ 2.17 (2.15%)
TELE 8.45 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TOMCL 35.13 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (0.83%)
TPLP 11.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.36%)
TREET 19.29 Increased By ▲ 0.66 (3.54%)
TRG 58.50 Decreased By ▼ -2.24 (-3.69%)
UNITY 34.80 Increased By ▲ 2.82 (8.82%)
WTL 1.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-1.24%)
BR100 11,651 Increased By 362.1 (3.21%)
BR30 35,478 Increased By 1338.1 (3.92%)
KSE100 108,239 Increased By 3134.6 (2.98%)
KSE30 33,694 Increased By 1139.4 (3.5%)

ISLAMABAD: Jamaat-e-Islami leader and former member of the National Assembly, Mian Muhammad Aslam has moved an intra-court appeal before the Islamabad High Court (IHC) against a single bench's verdict, wherein, it had rejected a petition filed against the recent increase in the petroleum products' prices in the country.

A division bench of the IHC comprising Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Maingul Hassan heard the ICA filed by Mian Aslam through his counsel, Rao Abdul Rahim Advocate.

In the ICA, he has cited the Federation of Pakistan through the president, the prime minister of Pakistan, the secretary Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Petroleum, and the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority as respondents. The petitioner's counsel requested the court to set aside singe bench's verdict and direct the respondents to decrease the petroleum products' prices.

He also requested the court to declare the imposition of multiple taxes at higher rates as unconstitutional and the respondent may be directed to reduce taxes over a commodity of basic need for the economy as well as the general public.

The lawyer prayed before the court that the respondents may be directed to revise the base prices of the petroleum products and reduce it as per the previous rates. Then, he requested the court to grant more time for preparation of the case. The bench accepted his plea and deferred the hearing for the next week.

In the ICA, the petitioner stated that during the instant crisis due to current pandemic COVID-19, the economy of our country as well as the worldwide markets have faced huge decline. Due to which the middle and lower income people are facing huge financial stress because of major cuts in their earnings.

He added that on 26th June, despite slight fluctuation in the crude oil prices in international market, the government has endorsed huge increase in prices of petroleum products in an illegal and hasty manner by increasing base price of the petroleum products and petroleum levy over it in total disregard to the lower international market prices of the petroleum prices as compared to the last calendar year prices for benefiting the large petroleum companies in an unjustified manner at the cost of adding miseries to already suffering public.

Earlier, a single bench of the IHC comprising Justice Athar Minallah had conducted hearing of the petition filed by Mian Aslam and dismissed the same after hearing the arguments in the matter.

Justice Athar had observed in the judgment that in the instant case nothing had been placed on record to indicate that a case was made out for interference by the court in a matter, which exclusively fell within the domain of the executive.

He had noted, "In the circumstances the prayers sought are not justiciable. Moreover, the matter is of a nature that this Court ought to exercise utmost restraint because intervention would prejudice the policies and actions of the executive in dealing with the challenges that relate to the economy."

He had added, "For the above reasons, the prayers sought are not justiciable and thus the petition is accordingly dismissed."

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020

Comments

Comments are closed.