Hassan Ali Grains (Pvt.) Ltd. and others. vs Government of Pakistan and others
This matter involves appeals challenging the imposition of regulatory duty by the government, which appellants contended amounted to a confiscatory levy, thereby violating constitutional protections regarding property rights and the freedom of trade. The core legal question addressed was whether the regulatory duty imposed via notifications dated 7-4-1986 and 17-4-1986 constituted an unconstitutional confiscatory exercise resulting in the deprivation of the right to property and the right to engage in lawful trade or business. Following a remand by the Supreme Court to the Sindh High Court, the High Court examined relevant domestic and international jurisprudence and concluded that the regulatory duty did not amount to a confiscatory levy. Upon review, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's reasoning and conclusion. The Court held that the regulatory duty in question was a valid exercise of state power and did not infringe upon the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, finding them to be without merit, thereby upholding the validity of the regulatory duty imposed by the government.
- Does the imposition of a regulatory duty by the government constitute a confiscatory levy?
- Does a regulatory duty violate the right to property guaranteed under Article 23 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Does a regulatory duty violate the right to engage in a lawful trade, business, or occupation under Article 18 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Article 18, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
- Article 23, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
1. ORDER: ' MR. JUSTICE JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA.--(1). C.As. 1555 to 1570 of 2007:--Neither the learned Advocate Supreme Court nor the Advocate-on-Record for the appellants has appeared in these cases despite listing of their names in the cause list. These appeals are, therefore, dismissed for non-prosecution.
2. ' C.As. 1553-1554 of 2007 and 170 of 2009:--We have heard Mr. Zahid Ibrahim, learned counsel for the appellant in C.As. 1553-1554 of 2007 and Mirza Hafeez ur Rehman, learned counsel for the appellant in C.A. 170 of 2009 at some length and have also gone through the judgment of this Court reported as Government of Pakistan, etc. v. Muhammad Ashraf and others (PLD 1993 SC 176). The relevant part of the said judgment in particular has been seen whereby on a very, limited question the Court remanded the case for adjudication by the High Court. The limited question was as to whether regulatory duty in these cases amounted to a confiscatory exercise by the State resulting in deprivation of the right to property and the right to engage in a lawful trade, business or occupation guaranteed under Articles 18 and 23 of the Constitution.
2. On remand, a learned Division Bench of the Sindh High Court examined the aforesaid questions and it has, after examining case-law from our own jurisdiction as well as that of the Indian and Northern. American jurisdictions, come to the conclusion that regulatory duty which was imposed by the government on 7-4-1986 and reduced on 17-4-1986 vide two notifications respectively dated '7-4-1986 and 217-4-1986, did not amount to a confiscatory levy. The reasoning of the impugned judgment appears in para 8 on wards and the facts relevant for the purpose of enabling the High Court to make an adjudication have also been noted in para 6 of the impugned judgment.
3. It is not necessary to reproduce the said reasoning or extracts from the impugned judgment and nor is, it necessary to repeat or regurgitate such reasoning because we are entirely in agreement with the same as well as the conclusion arrived at that the regulatory duty in question was not a confiscatory levy.
4. In view of the above discussion, these appeals, having no merit, are dismissed.