FUN INFOTAINMENT (PVT.) LIMITED/ NEO T.V., LAHORE vs PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY through it

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

FUN INFOTAINMENT (PVT.) LIMITED/ NEO T.V., LAHORE VS PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY through its Chairman, Islamabad Ss. 13, 26 & 29(6)---Delegation of powers of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) to Chairman PEMRA---Scope and principles---Council of Complaints ("COC")---Whether the Chairman PEMRA had the authority to approve the recommendations of the COC---Held, that as the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 ('the Ordinance') gives discretion to PEMRA to delegate its powers, responsibilities or functions subject to conditions imposed by rules and the power to make rules is conferred on PEMRA, the validity of the exercise of discretion will be judged by the same principles as the exercise of any other administrative discretion---Any rules delegating PEMRA's powers, responsibilities or functions must meet the test of reasonableness and non-arbitrariness -- Act of delegation must align with the statutory purpose---PEMRA while delegating a power, responsibility or function shall not exercise the discretion of delegation in a manner that distorts the purpose of the statutory scheme---Conditions accompanying such delegation should possess rationality---Furthermore, the determination of the suitable recipient for delegation primarily rests within the purview of PEMRA---Nevertheless, it is imperative that the selection be not characterized by irrationality, as any instance of improper delegation shall be a matter for the courts to decide---Power to impose fine, which was the recommended action in the present case, resides in Section 29(6) of the Ordinance and belongs to PEMRA---It follows that the COC is to place its recommendation before PEMRA and the power to impose fine vests in PEMRA---In the instant case, PEMRA has placed reliance on a decision taken in a meeting held on 31.07.2007 wherein the powers to approve the minutes of meeting of the COC in terms of Section 26 of the Ordinance was delegated to the Chairman PEMRA [Notification No. PEMRA-1(2)/Secy.2007-44 dated 01.09.2007]---Delegation could only be in terms of, and subject to, legally relevant and sustainable conditions imposed by rules---No rules have been framed whereby the authority to approve the recommendation of the COC has been delegated to the Chairman PEMRA---What PEMRA has done in its meeting dated 31.07.2007 has been to delegate the power in the very terms in which it was given to PEMRA to the Chairman PEMRA specifying no standards and leaving everything in the Chairman PEMRA's discretion---Public bodies in whom discretion is vested are under an obligation to confine and structure it by the promulgation of decisional criteria so as to strike the best balance in the context between rules and discretion---In the present case the Chairman PEMRA did not have any validly delegated authority to approve the recommendation of the COC---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed.

FUN INFOTAINMENT (PVT.) LIMITED/ NEO T.V., LAHORE vs PAKISTAN ELECTRONIC MEDIA REGULATORY AUTHORITY through its Chairman, Islamabad Ss — 2024 PLD 230 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD