Punjab ban on wheat movement withdrawn: Supreme Court disposes of petition

16 Sep, 2004

A three-member bench of Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, Justice Javed Iqbal and Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar on Wednesday disposed of petition by Pakistan Flour Mills Association regarding ban on movement of wheat by Punjab Government after Advocate General of Punjab, Shabbar Raza Rizvi informed the Court that the ban had been withdrawn from Tuesday last.
He told Justice Javed Iqbal that the order restricting the movement of wheat had lapsed and was not renewed but another, which applied to wheat products like flour and fines, was withdrawn on September 14.
The Court, however, declared the appeal as infructuous.
Shabbar Rizvi had furnished the copies of the order of withdrawal of ban at the very outset, but was opposed by flour mill owners' counsel from NWFP and other provinces.
They pressed a demand that the Supreme Court should not simply dispose of the appeal without any direction but should hold it to determine if the provincial authorities had the power to impose such a ban.
Justice Javed Iqbal and Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar asked the Advocate General that when the order was to be withdrawn then why was it imposed in the first instance.
The restrictive order, they said, had caused a lot of embarrassment and attracted strong exception in which Balochistan threatened to shut down the Sui gas supplies and Frontier Province to switch off power supplies from Warsak and Tarbela Dams.
Joined by Chief Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, they deplored the government action, saying that it caused unnecessary heart burning and tensions between provinces.
They, however, did not agree to retain the appeal for a final determination whether or not the government had the authority to use Section 144 of CrPC for this purpose, holding that since the cause of appeal had disappeared the hearing had become infructous.
However, the Chief Justice observed that in case they came across a similar situation again the Court would examine the legal powers of the authority in this context.

Read Comments