AIRLINK 74.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.34%)
BOP 5.14 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.78%)
CNERGY 4.55 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.94%)
DFML 37.15 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (3.66%)
DGKC 89.90 Increased By ▲ 1.90 (2.16%)
FCCL 22.40 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.9%)
FFBL 33.03 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (0.95%)
FFL 9.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.41%)
GGL 10.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.46%)
HBL 115.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-0.35%)
HUBC 137.10 Increased By ▲ 1.26 (0.93%)
HUMNL 9.95 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.12%)
KEL 4.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.22%)
KOSM 4.83 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (3.65%)
MLCF 39.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.33%)
OGDC 138.20 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (0.22%)
PAEL 27.00 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (2.16%)
PIAA 24.24 Decreased By ▼ -2.04 (-7.76%)
PIBTL 6.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.3%)
PPL 123.62 Increased By ▲ 0.72 (0.59%)
PRL 27.40 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.66%)
PTC 13.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.71%)
SEARL 61.75 Increased By ▲ 3.05 (5.2%)
SNGP 70.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.36%)
SSGC 10.52 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (1.54%)
TELE 8.57 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.12%)
TPLP 11.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-2.46%)
TRG 64.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-0.33%)
UNITY 26.76 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.73%)
WTL 1.38 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 7,874 Increased By 36.2 (0.46%)
BR30 25,596 Increased By 136 (0.53%)
KSE100 75,342 Increased By 411.7 (0.55%)
KSE30 24,214 Increased By 68.6 (0.28%)

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.