PAKISTAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Gov

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

PAKISTAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Pakistan Ss.14, 24 & 28---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration and injunction---Interim injunction, grant of---Reading down, principle of---applicability---Casting vote---Procedure to cast---Dispute was with regard to casting of vote by Chairperson for second time as there was equality of votes---Chairperson had cast vote second time in exercise of powers under Ss.24 (1)(5)(6) & 28 of Competition act, 2010---Validity---any member on the Commission was to be free from any preconceived or predetermined thoughts---Conclusiveness of dispute in the mind of a member before sitting on Commission, was a loss to ensure fair trial and due process and such situation could be idealized close to parti pris---Judge or a member in a quasi-judicial proceeding, untying naughts should not be the one already utilized---Such would negate the assurance of fair trial and due process guaranteed under art. 10-a of the Constitution---If statute required a decision started from a query, investigation, report, proceedings and/or then adjudication by any odd number of judges, with its lower and upper cap, it should be seen that each member was of independent and impartial mind and should not be carrying any weight of preconceived conclusion---Such situation of even number of member of commission in a quasi-judicial proceeding should not have happened---In the event of equality of votes reached the Chairman/Chairperson and / or any other member already rendered opinion, could not be saddled with additional responsibility to cast a vote to untie knot as it would destroy balance of each independent judicial mind being applied to a triable question under adjudication---Provision of S. 24(5) of Competition act, 2010 was to be read down to administrative functions and operations of Commission only arising under Competition Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations 2007 and was distinguished by the other regulation i.e. Competition Commission (General Enforcement) Regulations, 2007---Option of carrying out such exercise of casting vote again was not available in view of above understanding of law---High Court granted injunction to the extent of casting vote decision of Chairman/Chairperson, excluding casting vote decision of Chairperson, as it was a split decision by 2 vs. 2---application was allowed accordingly.

PAKISTAN SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Pakistan Ss — 2023 PLD 66 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD