Issue of PSMA office-bearers: IHC orders appellate body of MoC to hear pleas today

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) ordered the Appellate Committee of Ministry of Commerce to hear the petitioners today (10-12-2024) and decide the appeal already pending before it through a reasoned order in accordance with the law within 10 days.

A single judge bench of Justice Babar Sattar heard the petition against the order of Director General of Trade Organisations (respondent No 4) dated 15-11-24.

The petitioners, Faisal Ahmad Mukhtar and others, members of the duly elected Pakistan Sugar Mills Association (PSMA) (Central) approached the IHC against the order of respondent No 4 as they were aggrieved by the order dated 15-11-2024.

The petitioners had prayed to the Court to declare that the order passed by respondent No 4 on 15-11-2024 is without jurisdiction, illegal and unlawful, is appealable before the Appellate Committee Ministry of Commerce under Section 21(2) of the Trade Organisation Act, 2013.

They submitted that the committee to adjudicate upon the appeal though constituted is non-functional, and till such functionality and disposal of the appeal, they have been rendered remediless. They stated that in pursuance of the settled jurisdiction of the country, as a stop-gap arrangement, the operation of the impugned order may kindly be suspended as an alternative to the main relief of setting aside of the impugned order.

The petitioners are aggrieved by order 15-11-2024 pursuant to which the election of Chairman PSMA has been set-aside by Director General of Trade Organisations (respondent No 4).

The counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the impugned decision has been rendered in disregard of the relevant law and an appeal against the impugned decision was filed on 21-11-2024, which is pending adjudication before Appellate Committee of Ministry of Commerce (respondent No 2) and has not yet been adjudicated.

He contended that in the meanwhile the office of the Chairman PSMA is being held by a person, who has not authorised under law to hold such office. He; however, stated that the petitioners would be satisfied if a direction be issued to the respondent No 2 to decide the matter expeditiously.

After hearing the arguments, Justice Babar directed the counsel to send the copy of petition to respondent No 2, who will afford a hearing to the petitioners on 10-12-2024 and decide the appeal already pending before him through a reasoned order in accordance with law within 10 days. He then disposed of the petition.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024