The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday issued notice to federal and provincial authorities to reply to a petition of sugar mill owners questioning legality of the provision of Sugar Factories Control Act, 1950 that give provincial government powers to unilaterally fix a minimum price of sugarcane.
A division bench headed by Chief Justice Maqabool Baqar also issued notice to the deputy attorney general and the Sindh advocate general to submit their respective replies on the petition by November 1.
The petitioners, sugar mills’ owners, challenged the legality of section 16 of the Sugar Factories Control Act, 1950 which conferred uncontrolled and unguided powers and discretion on the provincial government to unilaterally decide on the pricing of sugarcane.
Advocate Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, representing the petitioners, submitted that the provisions of the Act imposed the unreasonable restriction on the petitioners to sell sugar at a loss as government fixes the minimum price of sugarcane arbitrarily and in that respect there is no reasonable protection against the misuse of power and no provision for check by way of the appeal or otherwise.
He said it was categorically envisaged in the prevailing national sugar policy that price of refined sugar shall be determined by free market and therefore in prevailing circumstances, the impugned provision has become anachronistic, discriminatory and redundant and same is therefore apt to be struck down.
The counsel said that adverse impact of notification put out under the impugned provision was that many of the sugar mills’ owners were being forced to supply and sell refined sugar at below their own cost of output. In this context, it may be graciously appreciated that the sugar manufactures including petitioners are not permitted to actually operate in a free market where each individual manufacturer is actually free to determine the purchase price of its inputs and raw material as well as the sale price for its end product.
The counsel pleaded to the court to restrain authorities from issuing the notification in respect of minimum price of sugarcane. The court was also requested to declare that the impugned provision violates the fundamental rights of petitioners and is ultra vires of the constitution.
Comments are closed.