SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 28, 30 & 37---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Issuance of Show Cause Notice by Competition Commission of Pakistan, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Issuance of the "impugned notices" is an initial yet primary step of the process to ensure fair opportunity, which is also akin to probability of mediation---Therefore, the constitutional petitions, in the instant point of time, were contradictory to the doctrine of probability of mediation---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---alternate and efficacious remedy---High Court, before granting relief to a Petitioner by exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under art. 199 of the "Constitution", must satisfy itself regarding the non-availability of any alternate remedy, or in case Court is inclined to grant relief even in presence of alternate remedy, Court should be satisfied that circumstances of the case make the other remedy inadequate---In presence of availability of an alternate efficacious remedy, jurisdiction of the High Court under art. 199 of the Constitution cannot be invoked. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 28, 30 & 37---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Issuance of Show Cause Notice by Competition Commission of Pakistan, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Whether extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court can be determinatively applied where the 'injury' is not actual rather perceived in the form of mere issuance of show cause notice---Held, that contents of impugned notices issued by the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) revealed that the petitioners (businessmen) had only been called upon to show cause in writing and to appear and place before the CCP, facts and material in support of their contentions and to avail the opportunity of hearing---Show Cause Notice is delivered to a person by an authority in order to get the reply back with a reasonable cause as to why a particular action should not be taken against him with regard to the defaulting act---By and large, it is a well-defined and well-structured process to provide the alleged defaulter with a fair chance to respond to the allegation and explain his position within reasonable timeframe"---Therefore, a show cause notice is not a testament of an adverse proceeding against a party rather it is an intimation of initiation of a process, which requires certain answers and clarifications from the party addressed---As such a show cause notice is not and ought not to be a culmination of unfavorable determination against the party but it is, and it must be adopted as a mode of opportunity to enable the party to provide explanation of certain facts or missing information as required by the relevant law in a case where shortcomings or omissions thereof surface or are noted either through the enquiry, tentative or otherwise, or by information received by the department in any other manner---Petitioners should have responded to the show-cause notice before seeking intervention, as this practice undermines the department's ability to proceed with cases effectively---Thus, mere issuance of a show cause notice is not an adverse order---Since through the "impugned notices" a chance was given to the "petitioners" to appear and produce evidence/material in response to the allegations levelled in the "enquiry report" therefore, the petitioners' grievance was not actual rather it was perceived---Present constitutional petition was filed against the "impugned notices" by the petitioners, which was not an adverse order and they had agitated an injury which was neither actual nor immediate rather was perceived and suppositious---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Preamble---Preamble to a statute is though not an operational part of the enactment but it is a gateway, which opens before the Court the purpose and intent of the legislature, which necessitated the legislation on the subject and also sheds clear light on the goals which the legislator aimed to secure through the introduction of such law---Preamble of a statute, therefore, holds a pivotal role for the purposes of interpretation in order to dissect the true purpose and intent of the law. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 199---Issuance of show cause notice, assailing of---Constitutional petition--- Maintainability--- Principles regarding maintainability of constitutional petition against mere issuance of show cause notice are: (i) Show Cause Notice is not an adverse order unless it could be clearly shown to the satisfaction of the Court that it has been issued by an authority not vested with jurisdiction or it was issued for mala fide reasons; (ii) The exception relating to want of jurisdiction does not include every jurisdictional error; a wrong exercise of jurisdiction or interpretation of the law cannot be treated as want of jurisdiction;(iii) Constitutional jurisdiction is exercised if the Court is satisfied that the person is an 'aggrieved party' within the context of art. 199 of the Constitution and no adequate remedy is provided by law; if adequate statutory remedies are provided under the relevant statute, it is to be taken into consideration while exercising discretion under art. 199 of the Constitution; (iv) By passing or circumventing statutory forums is to be discouraged; (v) The approach should be to advance the object and purpose of a statute and every effort should be made to uphold the sanctity of the legislative intent rather defeating it. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN art. 199---Issuance of a Show Cause Notice, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Mere issuance of a show cause notice does not amount to an adverse action; and a constitutional petition against a show-cause notice is not maintainable unless such a notice has been issued without lawful authority, is wholly without jurisdiction, coram non judice or is based on mala fides. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 'Show cause' notice---Definition. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Doctrine of ripeness---applicability and significance---Doctrine of ripeness ensures that Courts avoid premature adjudication by requiring disputes to be concrete and focused, preventing abstract disagreements over policies---This principle protects agencies from judicial interference until their decisions are formalized and felt by the challenging parties, allowing Courts to benefit from agency expertise and a developed record. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 28, 30 & 37---Competition Commission of Pakistan initiating enquiries on its own---Powers of---Section 28 of the Competition Act, 2010 ('the Act 2010') while delineating the functions and powers to the Competition Commission of Pakistan ('CCP'), empowers it (CCP) to initiate 'proceedings' in accordance with the procedures of the Act 2010---Section 28 of the Act 2010 explicitly states that the CCP may conduct enquiries into the affairs of any undertaking as may be necessary for the purposes of the Act 2010---Said broad mandate underscores the CCP's role as a proactive regulator, capable of initiating investigations to promote competition and prevent anticompetitive behavior---Section 30(1) of the Act 2010 empowers the CCP to make orders in cases of contravention of the provisions of Chapter II; it mandates that the CCP must adopt due process by providing notice of its intention to make such an order, thereby ensuring that the undertaking has an opportunity to be heard---This procedural safeguard is essential for maintaining fairness and transparency in the regulatory process---However, it is crucial to note that the initiation of an enquiry under S. 37 of the Act 2010 does not equate to a formal proceeding under S. 30 of the Act 2010, as the latter involves potential penal consequences---Section 37 of the Act 2010 is particularly pertinent to the CCP's authority to conduct enquiries---Subsection (1) of S. 37 of the Act 2010 empowers the CCP to initiate enquiries on its own or upon a reference from the Federal Government; this provision is significant as it allows the CCP to act independently, without waiting for a complaint or external prompting---Under S. 37 of the Act 2010, enquiries and studies are independent tools employed by the CCP to collect and assess information on market trends---Importantly, such enquiries do not constitute an adverse action or a formal proceeding under S. 30 of the Act 2010---CCP can initiate inquiries on its own accord under S. 37(1) of the Act 2010, which allows it to address potential violations proactively---CCP has authority to initiate enquiries based on its own assessment of market conditions, thereby enhancing its regulatory effectiveness---Thus, the Act 2010 does not pose any embargo upon CCP rather it empowers the commission to initiate enquiries on its own against any undertaking to serve the purposes of the Act 2010---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Show cause notice---Meaning and scope---Term Show Cause Notice is a formal communication that informs the recipient of alleged legal violations and provides them an opportunity to respond, embodying the principles of natural justice and due process, which ensures a fair hearing and protection of rights before any adverse action is taken. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN S. 30---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Issuance of Show Cause Notice, assailing of---Jurisdiction of Competition Commission of Pakistan, non-challenging of---Effect----Jurisdiction of Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) to issue the "impugned notices" had not been agitated by the petitioners---Petitioners has not controverted or challenged the authority of the CCP to issue 'notice' so no question of issuance of show cause notice without valid jurisdiction arises in any manner for maintainability of instant petition---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 30 & 37---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199--- Issuance of Show Cause Notice by Competition Commission of Pakistan, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Doctrine of ripeness---Petitioners (engaged in running businesses) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court assailing Show Cause Notices ("impugned notices") issued by the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) to protect the regime of antitrust law---Validity---Approach of the petitioners was contradictory to the doctrine of ripeness; this doctrine is also a determinative parameter for maintainability and merit adjudication of a constitutional petition within the bound of Art. 199 of the Constitution---Term 'ripeness' has been defined in Blacks' Law Dictionary, 11th Edition, as 'The state of a dispute that has reached, but has not passed the point when the facts have developed sufficiently to permit an intelligent and useful decision to be made'---Principle of ripeness is grounded in the notion that judicial resources must be preserved, ensuring that Courts engage only with disputes that are actual and immediate; it reflects the view that Courts should concern themselves with tangible, present, or imminent issues, avoiding the exhaustion of their efforts on abstract or perceived questions layered in probabilities and apprehensions; as such, judicial intervention is discouraged in matters that, at least for the time being, do not bear a direct or substantial impact on the parties involved---Therefore, present constitutional petitions, in the instant point of time, are contradictory to the doctrine of ripeness and prematurity---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 30 & 37---Punjab Environmental Protection Act (XXXIV of 1997), S. 16---Issuance of Show Cause Notice---Competition Commission of Pakistan---Powers and functions---Petitioners (engaged in running businesses) invoked constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court assailing Show Cause Notices ("impugned notices") issued by the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) to protect the regime of antitrust law---Section 30 (1) and (2) of Competition Act, 2010 ('the Act 2010'), is perimetria to S.16 of the Punjab Environmental Protection Act, 1997 wherein the Authority, Commission or Agency has to be satisfied of contravention of provision of the Punjab Environmental Protection Act, 1997, before making any proceedings in the case but such satisfaction cannot be done unless subsection 30(2) of the Act 2010 is invoked and thus it has to be read first as the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has to give notice of intention to make order and to give the undertaking an opportunity to be heard in detail---Section 30(2) of the Act 2010 then comes into play with the notice issued by the CCP with its intention to make orders stating reasons to the undertaking of contravention with some material which the CCP based it on; it then has to sit with the respondents and clarify whether there is any contravention of the provision of the Act 2010 and such notice issued under this section has to be read with S. 37(4) of the Act 2010 as per enquiry initiated under S. 37 of the Act 2010, which had already been done by the CCP in the present case---Language of S. 30(2) of the Act 2010 is very clear which states that the CCP first shall serve notice of its intention stating reasons to the undertaking and by giving an opportunity of being heard with supportive material whereas as per proviso to S. 30(2), the CCP can decide the case ex-parte in case the undertaking does not avail the opportunity of being heard---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. Citation Name: 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED VS FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss. 30, 37, 41, 42 & 44---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Issuance of Show Cause Notice by Competition Commission of Pakistan, assailing of---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Alternate and efficacious remedy not availed---It was an opportunity for the petitioners to explain their position and if they did so, the impugned notices were and ought to be deemed satisfied without any further adverse action---As the matter had not ripened under Chapter IV of the Competition Act, 2010, under which certain powers had been given to the Regulator to decide the matter and once it was decided by the CCP, the petitioners had the remedies under S. 41 of the Act 2010 by way of an appeal before the Appellant Bench of the Commission and an appeal to the Competition Appellate Tribunal under S. 42 of the Act 2010, and further appeal to the Supreme Court under S. 44 of the Act 2010, and such remedies had not been exhausted by the petitioners---If a Regulator is barred from exercising any of such functions, the purpose of law will not only be compromised but the intent behind making of such law will also be jeopardized---Moreover, if the Court starts interfering at initial steps of the Regulator for not initiating inquiry, then it will create hurdle for the Regulator to proceed in the matter to protect the very purpose and object of law---In presence of availability of an alternate efficacious remedy, jurisdiction of the High Court under Art. 199 of the Constitution cannot be invoked---High Court directed the petitioners to file their replies by agitating all points raised in these petitions before the CCP who shall proceed ahead with an objective approach to the matter strictly as per law---Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly.

SADIQ POULTRY (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN Ss — 2025 PLD 57 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD