ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday rejected oil marketing companies' (OMCs') petition against the newly-formed fuel crisis committee.
Chief Justice IHC Athar Minallah on Friday announced the verdict which he had reserved on June 25.
The verdict noted that a mere fact finding inquiry/probe was being conducted by the concerned executive authorities to identify the factors, which led to acute fuel shortage by exposing the general public to extreme inconvenience, and hardship.
Justice Minallah wrote that the petitioner companies definitely had a pivotal role in ensuring uninterrupted fuel supply to the general public.
It cannot be ruled out that hoarding or black marketing could be one of the factors that may have led to the crisis of fuel shortages, he added.
He maintained that the executive authorities in the circumstances were indeed justified to take timely measures including initiation of a probe/inquiry in order to ascertain the factors that had led to the unprecedented crisis causing extreme hardship and inconvenience to the general public.
According to the court's order, there is no force in the argument of one of the learned counsel that probe/inquiry could only have been conducted under the Pakistan Commission of Inquiries Act, 2017.
"Accepting this argument will amount to denying to the executive branch of the State, its prerogative to inquire or probe into matters of public importance in any manner as it deems appropriate. "Conducting an inquiry or probe is definitely not an adverse action nor can by any stretch of the imagination amount to prejudicing the rights of those who may be called upon to give information. The constitution of a commission under the Act of 2017 is one of the many modes available to the executive authorities to inquire or probe into a matter of public importance. It is inherent in the functions/obligations and duties assigned to the executive authorities to probe or inquire into any matter of public importance, which falls within its exclusive domain," said the court.
The IHC order continued that taking away this prerogative would cripple the functioning of the executive branch.
"The executive authorities will not be able to function nor discharge their obligations and duties if they are denied the liberty to inquire or probe matters in any manner they deem appropriate provided the proceedings are conducted in accordance with law and without infringing fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution."
It maintained, "There is no bar on the executive authorities to probe or inquire into the causes that had led to the crisis of fuel shortages and to identify and proceed against the persons responsible or who may have been contributing thereto merely because an entity has been licensed by the regulator under the Ordinance of 2002. No detrimental action has been taken against the petitioner companies nor its officials/employees as yet so as to give rise to a grievance, which may be justiciable under Article 199 of the Constitution by way of judicial review."
Justice Minallah stated that "keeping in view the nature of the crisis and its public importance, judicial restraint ought to be exercised because intervention by this Court in any manner may impede or interfere with the functions, duties and obligations of the executive authorities having consequences for the general public."
He added that "nonetheless, this Court expected that the executive authorities, while conducting the probe/inquiry would proceed strictly in accordance with the law, in a fair and transparent manner, and avoid causing unnecessary harassment to the officials/employees of the petitioner companies."
The Court further expected that the authorities would have regard to the principles of fair trial and refrain from making statements that could prejudice the rights of the petitioner companies. It also expects from the petitioner companies to cooperate in the matter, so that the inquiry/probe could be concluded at the earliest.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2020
Comments
Comments are closed.