Rawalpindi, Pakistan, The Rawalpindi bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday admitted a petition challenging the privatization process of Pakistan International Airlines and asked the top judicial officer to respond to the questions raised in the plea, Dawn reported. .
Justice Jawad Hassan issued the order on Friday on a pro bono petition filed against the procedure adopted to privatize PIA. Hassan also expressed his intention to examine the law introduced by the previous interim government to create an appeal court for privatization disputes.
The petition said the caretaker government put the airline up for sale without properly assessing its foreign and local assets as required by the Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000. The petitioner said the requirements of Section 23 of the Ordinance were not met. of the Privatization Commission of 2000. .
When the judge questioned the petitioner's counsel on the maintainability of the plea, he argued that while proceeding with the privatization process, the principles laid down by the Supreme Court were ignored, adding that the court could take up this case.
According to Dawn report, Justice Hassan recalled a judgment written by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in a case titled "Arshad Waheed Versus Province of Punjab and Others" where he detailed the powers of the High Court in such matters.
According to Justice Hassan, under Article 199 (high court jurisdiction) of the Constitution, the high court is empowered to review administrative actions from the point of view of violation of the law and the Constitution. However, he added that the power of judicial review is regulated by the principle of judicial restraint. “[J]udicial restraint encourages judges to exercise their powers with restraint and wisdom and to limit the exercise of their own powers to intervene in matters relating to [the] policy of statutory bodies/boards having financial perspective, results and exercise," he said.
The petitioner's counsel argued that his client is only challenging the privatization process of PIA because the mandatory requirement of publicity as contained in Section 23 (privatization announcement) of the Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000 has not been complied with, Dawn informed.
Justice Jawad Hassan issued the order on Friday on a pro bono petition filed against the procedure adopted to privatize PIA. Hassan also expressed his intention to examine the law introduced by the previous interim government to create an appeal court for privatization disputes.
The petition said the caretaker government put the airline up for sale without properly assessing its foreign and local assets as required by the Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000. The petitioner said the requirements of Section 23 of the Ordinance were not met. of the Privatization Commission of 2000. .
When the judge questioned the petitioner's counsel on the maintainability of the plea, he argued that while proceeding with the privatization process, the principles laid down by the Supreme Court were ignored, adding that the court could take up this case.
According to Dawn report, Justice Hassan recalled a judgment written by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah in a case titled "Arshad Waheed Versus Province of Punjab and Others" where he detailed the powers of the High Court in such matters.
According to Justice Hassan, under Article 199 (high court jurisdiction) of the Constitution, the high court is empowered to review administrative actions from the point of view of violation of the law and the Constitution. However, he added that the power of judicial review is regulated by the principle of judicial restraint. “[J]udicial restraint encourages judges to exercise their powers with restraint and wisdom and to limit the exercise of their own powers to intervene in matters relating to [the] policy of statutory bodies/boards having financial perspective, results and exercise," he said.
The petitioner's counsel argued that his client is only challenging the privatization process of PIA because the mandatory requirement of publicity as contained in Section 23 (privatization announcement) of the Privatization Commission Ordinance, 2000 has not been complied with, Dawn informed.
