CM PAK LIMITED vs The PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY Ss — 2025 CLC 750 ISLAMABAD

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

CM PAK LIMITED VS The PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY Ss. 7(1), 7(2), 23(1) & 33a(4)(b)---Universal Service Fund (USF) contribution---Delay---Demand of Late Payment additional Fee (LPaF)---Issue of enforcement of orders and penalties---Issuance of show cause notice---Culmination of proceedings by the Pakistan Telecommunication authority (PTa) by passing the order/decision----Licencee challenged the said order on the grounds that no LPaF could be imposed due to delay in payment of USF and since show cause notice was issued by the Director (Legal) PTa (delegatee) and not by PTa (Delegator), thus, PTa had no authority to proceed with the matter---Validity---Section 23 of the Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) act, 1996, (act) provides that where a licensee contravenes any provision of the act or the Rules made thereunder or any term or condition of the licence, PTa or any of its officers not below the rank of Director may, by written notice, require the licensee to show cause within thirty days as to why an enforcement order may not be issued---Continued failure on part of the licensee to pay the USF caused PTa to issue show cause notice to the licensee, explicitly mentioning that the Director (Law), PTa was issuing the said notice by exercising the delegated powers of PTa---No provision in the act or the Rules made thereunder prevented PTa from conducting proceedings pursuant to a notice which was issued by an officer exercising delegated powers of PTa---By delegating its power, the parent authority does not denude itself of its authority either to revoke the delegation or to exercise its power as a parent authority---Under S. 7(2) of the act, an appeal lays to PTa against any decision or order of any officer of PTa acting under the delegated powers of PTa---Order/decision had been passed by PTa and not by any officer of PTa acting under the delegated powers of PTa, thus, an appeal in terms of S.7(1) of the act against the said order/decision could be preferred before the High Court and as such no substance was found in the appellant's contention that since the show cause notice had been issued by the Director (Law), PTa, it was only he who should have conducted the proceedings pursuant to the said notice or to have taken a decision in the matter---Terms of the licence brought USF contribution within the rubric of annual fees, the non-payment or delay in the payment whereof entailed the imposition of LPaF---appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Your Search returned total 35531 records from 8750 - 8800

CM PAK LIMITED vs The PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY Ss — 2025 CLC 750 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC