ID :
168999
Thu, 03/17/2011 - 13:59
Auther :
Shortlink :
http://m.oananews.org//node/168999
The shortlink copeid
SHC dismisses petition question POL price hike formula
KARACHI, March 16, 2011 (PPI): A division bench of Sindh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Mushir Alam & Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Wednesday dismissed for non-prosecution petition questioning formula for recent nine percent hike in prices of petroleum products.
Petition was filed by Advocate Maulvi Iqbal Haider, who submitted 9% increase in prices of petroleum products by OGRA through notification dated December 31, 2010 was unjust & unfair. He contended anti-people policies of government had made lives of citizens miserable, accusing government of looting public through imposition of taxes, increases in POL products prices without any just criteria.
After nine percent surge, petrol price increased by Rs 6.71 per litre from Rs 72.96 to Rs 79.67 (9.2 percent), HOBC price by Rs 7.69 from Rs 86.67 to Rs 94.36, kerosene price by Rs 4.4 per litre from Rs 70.95 to Rs 74.99 (5.7 percent) & High Speed Diesel price by Rs 4.25 per litre from Rs 78.33 to Rs 82.58.This surge will increase inflation, put negative impact on industrial production already under pressure due to higher electricity, gas rates & energy shortfalls.
He argued after POL prices hike enhanced General Sales Tax, other taxes will also be imposed on citizens, which is contrary to Article 77 of Constitution as because without imposition of GST, other taxes on increased prices, oil companies cannot sell petroleum products as same this is illegal and violation of Constitution.
He prayed to declare increase in prices unjust, illegal and violation of Article 77 read with articles 4, 5, 9, 14, 18 and 25 of Constitution. It was also urged that formula made by Ogra or approval of the summary by government about increase in petroleum products should be declared against mandate of people.
On Wednesday, neither Petitioner Moulvi Iqbal Haider nor his counsel appeared.
SHC bench observed: “Since January 18, 2011 none is pursuing this matter. This matter was called in morning, but none is in attendance. It is being taken up in later part of the day, after process, neither petitioner nor his counsel is in attendance. It appears the petitioner has lost interest in matter. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.”
Petition was filed by Advocate Maulvi Iqbal Haider, who submitted 9% increase in prices of petroleum products by OGRA through notification dated December 31, 2010 was unjust & unfair. He contended anti-people policies of government had made lives of citizens miserable, accusing government of looting public through imposition of taxes, increases in POL products prices without any just criteria.
After nine percent surge, petrol price increased by Rs 6.71 per litre from Rs 72.96 to Rs 79.67 (9.2 percent), HOBC price by Rs 7.69 from Rs 86.67 to Rs 94.36, kerosene price by Rs 4.4 per litre from Rs 70.95 to Rs 74.99 (5.7 percent) & High Speed Diesel price by Rs 4.25 per litre from Rs 78.33 to Rs 82.58.This surge will increase inflation, put negative impact on industrial production already under pressure due to higher electricity, gas rates & energy shortfalls.
He argued after POL prices hike enhanced General Sales Tax, other taxes will also be imposed on citizens, which is contrary to Article 77 of Constitution as because without imposition of GST, other taxes on increased prices, oil companies cannot sell petroleum products as same this is illegal and violation of Constitution.
He prayed to declare increase in prices unjust, illegal and violation of Article 77 read with articles 4, 5, 9, 14, 18 and 25 of Constitution. It was also urged that formula made by Ogra or approval of the summary by government about increase in petroleum products should be declared against mandate of people.
On Wednesday, neither Petitioner Moulvi Iqbal Haider nor his counsel appeared.
SHC bench observed: “Since January 18, 2011 none is pursuing this matter. This matter was called in morning, but none is in attendance. It is being taken up in later part of the day, after process, neither petitioner nor his counsel is in attendance. It appears the petitioner has lost interest in matter. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.”
