GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, FOOD DEPARTMENT, through Secretary Food, Lahore and others vs Messrs UNITED SUGAR MILLS, LTD
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court whereby a writ petition filed by the respondent sugar mills was allowed, declaring a provincial government notification dated 31st March 1983 illegal and ineffective for lack of publication in the official Gazette under section 2(3) of the Punjab Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958. The core legal question concerns whether the failure or delay in publishing a statutory notification in the official Gazette renders it invalid ab initio, notwithstanding that the affected parties had knowledge of it and it was implemented. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, holding that the contention raised by the petitioners requires detailed examination, particularly in light of previous case law establishing that mere delay in publication does not necessarily invalidate a notification. Consequently, the operation of the impugned judgment of the High Court was suspended pending the final decision of the appeal. The key principle laid down is that the effect of non-publication or delay in official Gazette publication of a statutory notification warrants examination when the affected parties have actual knowledge and implementation has occurred.
- Does the failure to publish a notification in the official Gazette render it invalid under section 2(3) of the Punjab Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958?
- Whether delay or omission in the publication of a statutory notification in the official Gazette is fatal to its legal efficacy?
- Can a notification be treated as effective if it was not officially gazetted but was within the knowledge of the affected parties?
- Section 2(3), Punjab Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958
- Section 3, Punjab Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958
ORDER
' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment, dated 6th December, 2000 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby Writ Petition No,3100 of 1984 filed by respondent has been allowed.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that respondent is a company running sugar mills. It was required by the Provincial Government vide notification, dated 31st March, 1983 to deposit certain amounts, calculated in accordance with the terms of the said notification into an Export Fund created by the Federal Government. Respondent-Company challenged the said demand and notification by filing writ petition before Lahore High Court, Lahore with the averments that demand made by the Provincial Government is illegal and without jurisdiction because it is based on a notification not duly notified under the provisions of section 2, subsection (3) of the Punjab Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1958) as according to said provision every notification issued under section 3 of the Act, 1958 has to be duly notified in the official Gazette. Since the said notification has not been notified in the official Gazette, therefore, it cannot be treated as a notified order.
3. Learned Single Judge, in Chambers of Lahore High Court, Lahore after hearing both the sides allowed the writ petition by means of impugned judgment. As such instant petition has been filed.
4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner contended that Provincial Government had directed publication of the notification dated 31st March, 1983 in extraordinary Gazette but perhaps inadvertently it has not been published in the extraordinary Gazette. Therefore, according to him non-publication or delay in the publication would not be fatal and only for such reason the notification may have not been declared ineffective and invalid.
5. Mr. Maqbool Ellahi Malik, learned Advocate-General, Punjab, who was present in Court on some other case, on perusal of record stated that Printing Press of Pakistan must have published it in the extraordinary Gazette but if there is an omission, that can be rectified because fact remains that notification, dated 31st March, 1983 was in the knowledge of the respondent and all other concerned, dealing in the business of sugar manufacturing. According to him the object of publishing of a notification in the official Gazette is only to make it public for everyone to have knowledge about its existence.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and have examined relevant provisions of laws as well as the notification and the impugned judgment, carefully. In our opinion contention raised on behalf of petitioners needs examination because this Court in the judgment reported in Muhammad Siddique v. The Market Committee, Tandlianwala (1983 SCM R 785) and Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Defence and others v. Late Ch. Muhammad Ahsan through Legal Heirs and others (1991 SCM R 2180) has held that the delay in publication would not make it as invalid.
Therefore, in view of above discussion, leave to appeal is granted, inter alia, to examine the above contention.
C.M.A. No,644-L of 2002.--It is a fact that since 31st March 1983, the notification under examination was being fully implemented accordingly. As such pending decision of the petition, the operation of the impugned judgment is suspended.