Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: The Cabinet Division has moved the Supreme Court against a stay granted by the Lahore High Court (LHC) against the transfer of five regulatory authorities to respective ministries and divisions.

On December 12, 2016, the Cabinet issued a memorandum in which five regulatory authorities were transferred to their respective ministries.

The authorities are the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA), Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), Frequency Allocation Board (FAB), Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (OGRA) and Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA). However, on February 21st, a single-member bench of the LHC suspended the memorandum on the writ petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Jahangir Khan Tareen until the next date of the hearing (April 21).

Now, law officer Sajid Bhatti moved the SC, making PTI leaders Jahangir Khan Tareen, Shafqat Mehmood, and Shireen Mazari respondents.

“As a matter of fact, the attached department or regulatory authorities were already attached to one or another division of the federal government and there was a new allocation in the larger public interest by the prime minister in exercise of the power vested in him by Article 90 which was in line with the letter and spirit of the constitution and rules,” the application read.

It added that the existing Rule 3 of Rules of Business 1973 had not been declared ultra vires by the SC. Therefore, the transfer of authorities was in accordance with the law, adding that it seemed that this aspect had escaped the notice of the LHC.

“The suspension of the memorandum by the LHC appears to have provided the final ad-interim stage which seems to ignore the settled principle and practice of the HC that the final relief cannot be granted at an ad-interim stage,” the application stated.

“Suspension of the memorandum has direct nexus with the public revenue; therefore, the balance of inconvenience lies in favor of the present petitioner as much as the respondent and it may burdened financial liability and irreparable loss,” the application read further.

“LHC failed to consider Article 154 (1) wherein the Article provides power to the Council of Common Interest to formulate and regulate policies in relation to matters provided in Part II of the Federal Legislative List and exercise supervision and control over related institutions, but the transfer of Regulatory Authorities to their line Ministries in the instant matter is purely an administrative measure to deal with day to day routine matter and shall not come within the ambit of CCI,” the application affirmed.

It added that the LHC had also not considered the fact that the independent and autonomy of the authorities were enshrined in their respective statute and no change had been made in those. They, therefore, continued to be as independent and autonomous as before. The suspension is not in accordance with the law on the subject at all, it concluded.