SUGAR MILLS vs GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others
This judgment disposes of Writ Petition No. 3100 of 1984 and Writ Petition No. 340 of 1985, filed by sugar mills challenging a memorandum dated 31-3-1983 requiring them to deposit amounts into an Export Fund. The core legal question was whether a memorandum issued under Section 3 of the Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958, is legally valid without being published in the Official Gazette as a notified order. The Lahore High Court held that since the statute explicitly defines a notified order as one published in the Official Gazette, the unnotified memorandum lacks lawful authority and legal validity. The court distinguished the precedent cited by the respondents, ruling that statutory requirements for official gazette notification cannot be bypassed. Consequently, the court declared the memorandum to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect, and held that the petitioners are entitled to a refund of the amounts deposited pursuant to it.
- Whether an order issued under Section 3 of the Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958, requires publication in the Official Gazette to be valid?
- Does a memorandum not duly notified in the Official Gazette have any legal validity as a notified order under the Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958?
- Are petitioners entitled to a refund of amounts deposited pursuant to a memorandum declared to be without lawful authority?
- Whether the requirement of notification in the Official Gazette can be dispensed with when the governing statute expressly defines a notified order as requiring such publication?
- Section 3, Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958
- Section 2 subsection (3), Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958
' This judgment shall dispose of Writ Petition No,3100 of 1984 and Writ Petition No,340 of 1985.
2. The petitioners are companies running sugar. They were required by a memorandum dated 31- 3-1983, to deposit certain amounts calculated in accordance with the terms of the said memorandum, into an Export Fund created by the Federal Government.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners have argued that the said memorandum dated 31-3-1983, which was purportedly issued under section 3 of the Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, 1958, was, in fact, without any lawful authority. The basis of this contention is that an order under section 3 of the aforesaid Statute has to be a notified order as defined in section 2 subsection (3) of the aforesaid Statute. It is clear from the said statutory provisions that for an order under section 3 to be treated as a notified order, it has to be duly notified in the Official Gazette. Admittedly, the memorandum dated 31-3-1983 was never notified in the Official Gazette. In this view of the matter, it is evident that the said memorandum cannot be treated as a notified order and, as such, it has no legal validity.
The statutory provisions themselves are clear. However, learned counsel for the petitioners also refer to the case titled "Messrs Kalimullah & Co. v. The Government of West Pakistan and another"
(PLD 1961 '(W.P.) Lahore 321). The cited precedent is authority for the legal proposition advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners.
4. The learned Law Officer, however, argued that in view of the dictum laid down in the case titled "Khan Faizullah Khan v. Government of Pakistan through the Establishment Secretariat and another"
PLD 1974 Supreme Court 291), the memorandum dated 31-3-1983 should be construed as a valid and binding order even though it has not been notified in the Official Gazette. This contention of the learned Law Officer is not well-founded. The case of Khan Faizullah Khan is clearly distinguishable.
It is to be noted that the Honourable Supreme Court, while deciding the precedent case, expressly held that there was no requirement for the rules being considered in the said judgment, to be notified in the Official Gazette. As such, the degree of formality which is requirement under the Punjab Food Stuffs (Control) Act, was clearly issuing in the case of Khan Faizuliah Khan. As such, reference to be cited precedent by the learned Law Officers is of no help to the case set up by him.
5. In view of the above discussion, it is not necessary to consider the other arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners to assail the impugned memorandum. It is declared that the said memorandum dated 31-3-1983 is without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
6. The petitioners contend that they have deposited certain amounts with the Provincial Government, pursuant to the aforesaid memorandum dated 31-3-1983. As a consequence of the above order, it is clear that the said amounts were not lawfully due and payable by the petitioners.
Consequently, the petitioners would be entitled to claim refund of the amounts, so deposited by them.
Cited by 4 cases
- Pakistan Sugar Mills Association (PSMA), Islamabad through Secretary 2021 [M] C L R 90, 2021 P C T L R 39, 2021 PLD Islamabad 55
- MIRPURKHAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED through Wasif Khalid Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Cabinet Division, Islamabad 2021 PLD 418
- Pakistan Sugar Mills Association and others vs Federation of Pakistan and others 2020 IHC 132
- Pakistan Sugar Mills Association and others vs Federation of Pakistan and others 2021 IHC 294