Messrs AYESHA TEXTILE MILLS Ltd. vs GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN Through Secretary, Ministry Of Commerce, Islamabad And Other
This matter concerns appeals against orders issued by an Enquiry Officer under the War Risks Insurance Ordinance, 1971, which assessed the insurable value of goods and a factory, ordering the payment of evaded premiums, surcharges, and penal interest. The petitioner had initially challenged these assessment orders directly through constitution petitions in the Lahore High Court rather than pursuing the statutory appellate remedy. Following the precedent established in Pakistan Chrome Mines Ltd v. The Enquiry Officer, War Risk Insurance (Sind and Baluchistan), the Supreme Court addressed the procedural irregularity of bypassing the appellate forum. The Court held that where an appeal was not filed against the Enquiry Officer's order, the appropriate course of action is to remand the matter to the designated appellate authority for a decision on the merits. Consequently, the Court directed that the pending constitution petitions be treated as appeals against the Enquiry Officer's orders and remanded the cases to the Ministry of Commerce, Insurance Wing, for adjudication on the merits.
- Can a constitution petition filed against an assessment order under the War Risks Insurance Ordinance, 1971 be treated as an appeal?
- Is it appropriate for the Supreme Court to remand a matter to the appellate authority when the petitioner bypassed the statutory appellate process by filing a writ petition?
- War Risks Insurance Ordinance, 1971
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--In these appeals, by orders dated 30-1-1974 and 25-9-1975, the Enquiry Officer acting under the War Risks Insurance Ordinance, 1971, assessed the insurable value of the goods and the factory and ordered the payment of Rs.13,024.06 and Rs.5,68,528.28 respectively as evaded premium, surcharge and penal interest.
2. Without filing an appeal against this order, the petitioner impugned the assessment order in writ jurisdiction of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, by two separate constitution petitions, but did not succeed as these were dismissed by judgment, dated 17th of January, 1977. Today when these appeals came up for hearing, the counsel for the parties stated that in a like case reported as Pakistan Chrome Mines Ltd v. The Enquiry Officer, War Risk Insurance (Sind and Baluchistan)
3. Ministry of Commerce 1983 SCMR 1208, as no appeal was filed against the order of the Enquiry Officer, the case was remanded to the appellate authority for decision, and that the same course should be followed so far as these appeals are concerned.
4. Accordingly, we would remand these appeals to the appellate authority (Ministry of Commerce, Insurance Wing, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad) for decision on merits, and for that matter the constitution petitions in the High Court should be treated as appeals against the orders of the Enquiry Officer. There will be no order as to costs.