WATAN PARTY and anothers vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others
The petitioners invoked the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, alleging that inordinate delays in the Underground Coal Gasification project at Tharparkar violated fundamental rights under Articles 9 and 38. They sought directions for the immediate release of federal and provincial funds to expedite the project, citing its necessity for national economic stability and electricity generation. During proceedings, government officials confirmed the release of Rs. 900 million and committed to releasing the remaining balance within the current financial year. The Court held that under the constitutional trichotomy of powers, policy-making and the determination of development priorities fall within the exclusive domain of the executive. The judiciary cannot assume these functions or interfere with resource allocation unless there is evidence of mala fides or a direct violation of fundamental rights. Finding that substantial funds had been released and the project was progressing, the Court disposed of the petition as having served its purpose.
- Article 184(3) of the Constitution
- Article 9 of the Constitution
- Article 38 of the Constitution
- Article 29 of the Constitution
- Chapter 2, Part-II of the Constitution
ORDER
ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI J.---The petitioners, by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 "the Constitution", making specific reference to Articles 9 and 38 of the Constitution, have brought this petition to agitate their grievance against the respondents for the inordinate delay in the gasification project "the Project" from available Thar Coal Reserves in Pakistan. In this context, they have strongly criticized the respondents for their policies, priorities, non-mobilization of funds etc. And made following prayers in the petition:-- "(1) It is therefore respectfully prayed that development of national natural resources may be allowed to develop for the betterment fall citizen in Pakistan.
(ii) It is further prayed no hindrance may be allowed to develop the committed financial project of Underground Coal Gasification at Tharparkar or else where and the Sindh Govt. May be directed to release Rs,200 Millions and Federal Govt. To release funds of Rs,5 billions immediately.
(iii) It is further prayed, that amount of total required, amount at present of Dollars 1.2 Billions, may also be arranged for 84 gasifiers as promised by the Government of Pakistan.
(iv) Any other relief to people of Pakistan under these circumstances may be allowed."
2. During the proceedings of the petition, keeping in view the plea of fundamental rights guaranteed to every citizen of this Country under the Constitution qua wider meaning of "fundamental right" given by this Court in its various pronouncements (see: PLD 1994 SC 693), vide order dated 17-4-2012, notices were issued to the concerned Government functionaries/respondents. In response to it, on their behalf, earlier some Government officials have appeared and submitted their replies. Respondent No,3 (Government of Sindh), in its para wise comments has stated that the project in question is federally funded project, approved by ECNEC, therefore, all its funds are also to be provided by the Federal Government, and there is no occasion for the Government of Sindh to release any funds from their budget for the purpose of this project.
3. The petitioner No,2, in his submissions, highlighted the importance of the project for the better future prospects of the economy and the ordinary citizens of this Country. He recounted number of planning lapses, which, according to him, are largely instrumental in derailing the economy, in particular, due to acute shortage of electricity resulting in closure of number of industrial units of public importance, consequent increase in unemployment and large scale load shedding in urban and rural areas of the Country. To fortify his submissions, he placed on record various reports of planners and experts in the field of electricity generation through use of underground coal reserves. He further placed on record a copy of "Thar Coal Presentation" and bunch of newspapers cuttings to lay further stress for early completion of the project.
4. In order to make further progress in this petition, on 4-10-2012, an order was passed by this Court calling upon the Secretary, Coal and Energy Development Department, Government of Sindh and Secretary, Planning and Development Division, Government of Pakistan to appear before this Court and answer some relevant queries.
5. Today, in response to it, Mr. Ajaz Ali Khan, Secretary Coal and Energy Development Department, Government of Sindh is present. He states that the Federal Government has already released Rs,900 million for the Project and after release of these funds, now work at site is in progress for lasification and initial generation df 8 to 10 mega watts of electricity; which shall be thereafter expanded on regular basis. Mr. Abdur Rehman, Chief (S&T), Planning Commission, present on behalf of Secretary, Planning & Development Division, Government of Pakistan also confirms that Rs,900 million have been already released by the Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan for the Project, while the remaining sum of Rs,900 million will also be released within the current financial year, to expedite the progress on this Project. Both the officials are directed to place on record all these facts and figures in writing.
6. Barrister Zafarullah Khan, when confronted with the above factual position, contends that in this regard the policies and priorities of the Government are neither pragmatic nor bona fide, therefore petitioners have been compelled to approach this Court in order to seek necessary direction's as regards expeditious completion of the Project, which is likely to play a vital role in the economic development of the country and for the betterment of its poor people.
7. We are afraid that at the instance of petitioners, in order to expedite the progress of the Project, we cannot assume the functions of policy making or determining the priorities of various development projects in the country, which are the exclusive domain and functions of B the Federal and Provincial Government, as the case may be, who have their own ministries, departments, commissions and consultants, etc. For policy. Making, determining the priorities of various development projects and its implementation. It is pertinent to mention here that under c the scheme of the Constitution having its structure based on trichotomy of power amongst its different organs i.e, legislature, executive and judiciary, each of its organ has to work and exercise its authority strictly within its mandate, without encroaching upon or usurping the jurisdiction/functions of any other organ of the State.
8. From the bare reading of the Constitution, particularly, Articles 29 and 38 of Chapter 2, Part-II, relating to principles of policy, it is evident that policies are to be made by the respective Federal and Provincial Governments and all decisions regarding their implementation are also to be taken by them on the basis of determined priorities of different projects and availability of financial resources at their disposal. Obviously, this exercise cannot be ordinarily interfered with by this Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, unless shown to be mala fide or in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution to every citizen of this Country, thereby affecting the interest of public at large.
9. In view of the above statement of facts by the two concerned officials from the Federal Government and the Provincial Government and the material placed on record, at this stage, We are satisfied that no further action is required to be taken in this petition, which has served its purpose to a greater extent upon release of 50% funds for the Project and commitment of the Federal Government for release of remaining 50% funds within this financial year. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.
Cited by 44 cases
- Syed Muhammad Alam Shah vs Province of Punjab & others 2025 SHC 730
- Muzaffarabad and 13 others vs Fiaz Ahmed and 25 others 2024 PLJ SC (AJ&K) 167
- Karam Ceramics Ltd & others vs Federation of Pakistan & Others 2023 SHC 80
- Anam Bibi vs Secretary, Punjab Public Service Commission, Lahore & 2023 LHC 537
- Muhammad Zawar Hussain vs Province of Punjab and others 2022 PLD Lahore 445
- M/s 3N-LIFEMED PHARMACEUTICALS vs Government of Punjab through 2021 LHC 7445
- Messrs 3N-Lifemed Pharmaceuticals vs Government of Punjab through Secretary Primary and Secondary Healthcare Department and others 2023 CLC 948
- Miss Mahnum Hussain and other vs British Council Pakistan and others 2021 CLC 1583, 2021 LHC 7013
- Liaqat Ali vs National Accountability Bureau 2020 IHC 62
- Liaqat Ali vs National Accountability Bureau 2023 YLR 637
- Amjad Mehmood vs Government Of Punjab through Chief Secretary and 6 2020 PLC (C.S.) 375
- INHABITANTS OF VILLAGE PRENIA through Hafeez Ahmed and 4 others vs AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 9 others 2019 P.S.C 761, 2019 MLD 564
- TCS Private Limited & others vs Pakistan Post & another 2019 PLJ Karachi 1, 2019 PLD Sindh 69, 2018 SHC 857
- TCS Private Limited & others vs Pakistan Post & another 2019 PLJ Karachi 1, 2019 PLD Sindh 69, 2018 SHC 857
- Karamat Ullah Khan Chaudhry vs The Federation of Pakistan and 2 others 2017 LHC 4440
- KARAMAT ULLAH KHAN CHAUDHRY vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and 2 others 2018 PLC (C.S.) 555
- AAMIR LUTUF ALI ZARDARI vs PROVINCE OF SINDH and others 2019 CLC 224
- Muhammad Akhtar and 183 others vs Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government through its Chief Secretary New Civil Secretariat Muzaffarabad and 7 others 2016 SC AJK 231
- Muhammad Akhtar S/o Iqbal Khan, I.D Card No. 82203-2809236-1, R/o Jand Graan P.O Garhi Dupatta District Muzaffarabad and 183 others vs Azad Jammu and Kashmir Government through its Chief Secretary New Civil Secretariat Muzaffarabad and 7 others 2016 SC AJK 23
- MUHAMMAD AKHTAR and 183 otherss vs AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, New Civil Secretariat, Muzafarabad and 7 others 2016 YLR 2163
- Ms. IMRANA TIWANA and others vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others 2015 KLR Civil Cases 213, 2015 LHC 2551, 2015 PLD Lahore 522, 2015 CLD 983
- Ms. IMRANA TIWANA and otherss vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others 2015 LHC 2551, 2015 PLD Lahore 522
- Ms. Imrana Tiwana vs Province of Punjab 2015 KLR Civil Cases 213
- Ms. Imrana Tiwana, etc. vs Province of Punjab, etc. 2015 LHC 2551
- Petro Oil (Put) Limited vs The Federation of Pakistan & others 2015 LHC 1
- Petro Oil (Pvt.) Limited vs Federation of Pakistan and others 2015 P.C.T.L.R. 747
- DOSSANI TRAVELS PVT. LTD and others vs Messrs TRAVELS SHOP (PVT) LTD. 2014 PLD Supreme Court 1
- PETRO OIL (PVT.) LIMITED through Chief Executive vs FEDERATION OF ISLAMIC 2015 LHC 1, 2015 CLC 1030
- Shahid Pervaiz and 23 others vs Ejaz Ahmad and 23 others 2016 SCP 118
- BAHRIA TOWN (PVT.) LIMITED through Administrator vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and 11 others 2017 CLC 1793
- Dr. KHUSHNOOD ALI BAZ and 111 others vs GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER 2018 YLR 512
- ARSHAD HUSSAIN KHAN and 16 others vs INHABITANTS OF ISLAM NAGAR 2019 P.S.C 755, 2019 CLC 877
- WASEEM RIAZ and 119 others vs MINISTRY OF CAPITAL ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT (CADD) through Secretary and another 2019 PLC (C.S.) 403
- Muhammad Amin and another vs Ministry Of Interior, through Secretary, Government of Pakistan and 2 others 2021 [M] C L R 902, 2021 PLC (C.S.) 615
- Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani vs Federation Of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and 5 others 2022 PLD Islamabad 326
- Anam Bibi vs Secretary, Punjab Public Service Commission, Lahore and 6 2023 PLC (C.S.) 1552
- Miss Nigareen Zeb vs Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secratery Home & Tribal Affairs Department, Peshawar & others 2024 PHC 242, 2024 MLD 1801, 2025 PLJ Peshawar 16
- Miss Nigareen Zeb vs Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through Secratery Home & Tribal Affairs Department, Peshawar & others 2024 PHC 242, 2024 MLD 1801, 2025 PLJ Peshawar 16
- Ch. LATIF AKBAR, FORMER FINANCE MINISTER, AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD Versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR 2017 PLD 32
- FEROZ KHAN SHUJA Versus PAKISTAN MEDICAL COMMISSION through President, Islamabad 2023 MLD 1285
- SHAHID PERVAIZ Versus EJAZ AHMAD 2017 SCMR 206
- MUHAMMAD SAMMI ABRO Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Education 2017 PLC(CS) 419
- Syed MUHAMMAD ALAM SHAH Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary 2026 CLD 310
- Syed MUHAMMAD ALAM SHAH Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary 2026 PLD 17