ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) declared that Pakistan Microfinance Investment Company Limited (PMICL), registered under the Companies Act, 2017 and being regulated by Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, is not a ‘Public Body’.
Barrister Jahanzeb Awan, representing the PMICL (petitioner), submitted that ‘Public Body’ is defined in Section 2 (ix) of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 (the Act) and stated that none of the categories provided in Section 2 (ix) (a) (h) of the Act is attracted in the facts and circumstances. He further submitted that the Commission dealt with the said objection of the petitioner in an arbitrary manner and did not give cogent reasons for holding appeal of respondent No.2 as maintainable.
The judgment, authored by Justice Aamir Farooq, did not agree with the reasons, which prevailed in the Islamabad High Court judgment. It is noted that Pakistan Information Commission (respondent No.1) dealt with this issue in a cursory manner without providing reasons for holding a position that the petitioner is a ‘Public Body’.
The FCC judgment further said that the High Court also, based on the assumption of respondent No.2 (ex-employee of PMICL), came to the conclusion that since 49 percent of the shareholding/contribution is by Poverty Alleviation Board; hence, is a ‘Public Body’. “Even, stance taken by respondent No.2 before us, is that it is engaged in public functions, hence the petitioner is a ‘Public Body’, is without substance,” the FCC further noted.
The Respondent No.2, a former employee of Pakistan Microfinance Investment Company Limited joined the services in the referred Organisation in December, 2016 and resigned in August, 2023. On May 24th, 2024, he initially approached the petitioner (PMICL) for access to record regarding payment and repayment of the company’s Chief Executive Officer. Since he did not find luck with his request, he filed an appeal on email on 29.05.2024 before Pakistan Information Commission.
The petitioner, in response to the appeal, controverted the same raising certain objections regarding maintainability and documents being sought forming part of permissible documents under the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 (the Act).
The Commission allowed the said appeal on 10.09.2024 and the petitioner was directed to provide information within ten days.
The petitioner challenged the Commission’s order before the Islamabad High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution. The said writ petition was dismissed by the Judge-in-Chambers through the impugned judgment dated 28.01.2026, hence, the instant petition for leave to appeal.
The FCC observed that the record of petitioner sought by respondent No.2 was with respect to various documents regarding payment and repayment of Chief Executive Officer of the petitioner; these arguments do not, in any way, fall within the ambit of section 6 of the Act and cannot form basis for approaching respondent No.1.
The judgment said that the High Court did not take into account the referred aspect of the matter at all and dealt with the objections of the petitioner in a cursory manner and even, the conclusion reached, was erroneous. It added that in light of the law and facts, the decision handed down by Commission as well as of the High Court is not tenable and merits set aside.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments