Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) has declared the government’s notification relating to a ban on establishment or expansion of new sugar mills lawful.

The court dismissed four civil appeals wherein a judgement dated February 26, 2013 passed by the Lahore High Court was challenged.

The petitioners, including Tariq Khan Mazari, Arshad Javed Ahmed, Begum Syeda Iqbal and M/s Punjnad Sugar Mills Limited, said in their separate appeals that the ban was tantamount to violation of freedom of trade, business or profession, envisaged under Article 18 of the Constitution.

The Punjab government through a notification dated December 6, 2006, had imposed a ban on establishment of new sugar mills and expansion of the existing mills because the sugracane crop was affecting the wheat crop in the province. The government was of the view that sugarcane crop was affecting food security and the textile industry.

However, a 30-page judgement authored by Justice Qazi Faez Isa said that remedies would be an exercise in futility in the presence of the impugned notification, as it was not expected that a government functionary could, or even should, take a decision contrary to government’s policy decision incorporated in the impugned notification.

The court ruled that the notification was undoubtedly within the executive authority of the government however it could be challenged if it is proved that it was issued with a mala fide intent or it was against the public or the national interest.

“The fact that there were a number of reasons justifying the issuance of the impugned notification and each reason in itself is sufficient to be categorised as constituting the public or national interest,” the judgement stated.

The judgement further stated that the decision to impose the ban would not benefit or punish anyone, but ensure the organised and planned growth of the industry. By imposing a ban, the existing sugar mills may have to face a weak competition.

“The decision to impose the ban was taken after long deliberations and on the advice of experts and we have not been shown any mala fide or ulterior motive of the government in taking this decision. On the contrary, it may well be stated that if the government had not finally acted it would have devastated the environment and food security as well as undermined the economy,” the court observed.