PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

M/s Ch. A Latif & sons (Pvt.) Limited vs National Highway Authority, through Chairman art — 2025 YLR 2080 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Citation
2025 YLR 2080 ISLAMABAD
Court
Islamabad High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
YLR
Parties
M/s Ch. A Latif & sons (Pvt.) Limited vs National Highway Authority, through Chairman art
Subject matter
Constitutional

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

Judgment text as reported

M/s Ch. A Latif & sons (Pvt.) Limited VS National Highway Authority, through Chairman art.199---Public Procurement Rules, 2004, Rr.48 & 48(7)---Constitutional petition, maintainability of---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---adequate remedy of appeal, non-availing of---Effect---Pre-qualification for award of contract, application for---Disqualification on the ground of non-compliance with pre-qualification requirements---Remedy of appeal provided before Public Procurement Regulatory authority (PPRa)---Scope---against disqualification from the pre-qualification process the petitioners availed the remedy provided under Rule 48 before the 'grievance redressal committee' (GRC)---against the decision of GRC the petitioners invoked Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court instead of availing the remedy of appeal provided under R.48(7) of PPRa before---Validity---The GRC constituted pursuant to Rule 48 of Public Procurement R.2004 (PPR 2004)was an adequate alternate forum, where a bidder could raise his grievance with respect to any matter regarding the tender bidding process after the submission of the bid---In the present case, the petitioners having the alternate remedy of appeal under R.48(7) of PPR, 2004, after dismissal of complaint by GRC, invoked the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court without exhausting the alternate remedy ---The moment the petitioners entered the prequalification stage of the procurement process, they squarely fell within the ambit of R.48 of PPR, 2004---However, instead of availing the remedy within the framework of Rule 48 and adhering to the prescribed limitations, the petitioners opted to shift forums midway, and such act amounted to forum shopping, which could not be countenanced by the High Court---The petitioners approaching GRC against the impugned letter issued by NHa had elected a statutory remedy available under R.48 of PPR, 2004, hence, they could not therefore be allowed to avail remedy under constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court.

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English