Pakistan Kissan Ittehad filed a civil petition for leave to appeal (CPLA) through Pakistan Bar Council Vice Chairman Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon, challenging Lahore High Court verdict which had declared relocation of three sugar mills owned by the Sharif family from central Punjab to southern Punjab illegal in September last year. The Lahore High Court had declared relocation of Sharif family mills illegal including Chaudhry Sugar Mills, Ittifaq Sugar Mills and Haseeb Waqas Sugar Mills.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, Justice Mushir Alam and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah observed if the mills were relocated in southern Punjab unlawfully then the same would be shifted from the area. Appearing before the bench, counsel for Sharif family sugar mills apprised that his clients' sugar mills were not operative whereas the Lahore High Court has asked to relocate the mills from southern Punjab.
Turning down request of the Sharif family's counsel to suspend Lahore High Court verdict till final decision of the CPLA in hand, Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar observed the court will not grant stay order but shall conduct day to day hearing in the matter for sugarcane growers' interest. Challenging the Lahore High Court verdict in the matter, the farmer's body and two other petitioners termed the high court's decision as detrimental to the economics of sugarcane growth, crushing and processing and is consequently contrary to national interest.
The petitioners said that the high court didn't consider that farmers were able to cultivate a cash crop which enabled them to create a food basket in rural areas on otherwise vacant land and whether this is a crop which contributes greatly to Pakistan's economy as well as rural development. Pakistan Kissan Ittehad further said that the petitioners should not have to bear the losses as a result of a ban on relocation simply because three industries may have acted in a mala fide manner.
The petitioners claimed that the high court verdict has strangulated the principle of competition within an industry, adding the high court failed to take into consideration that by striking down relocation policy, it had drastically affected growth of a cash crop and decimated standing crops on land that would otherwise be very poorly utilized. The counsel for petitioners pleaded that relocation policy promoted equality and equal opportunity and was not discriminatory in any respect, saying they no longer have sugar mills in close proximity and will be unable to gain the same profit that is afforded to other cane growers in the area.
Terming relocation policy well structured and reasonable, the petitioners alleged the Lahore High Court verdict is tantamount to a violation of their fundamental rights under Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Pakistan Kissan Ittehad submitted that relocation policy is the holistic one which takes into consideration the interests of the growers, the consumers and the economy and has effectively punctured the monopoly of a few sugar mills located in southern Punjab.
"The relocation policy cannot be struck down if it had been misused by a few, especially if the policy was by itself reasonable, rational and sound for the promotion of growers of sugarcane and for the entire industry as a whole," said the petitioners. The petitioners' counsel argued that they are forced into selling their crop at reduced rates to the existing sugar mills in south Punjab and they will suffer irreparable loss and injury.
Seeking leave to appeal the petitioners urged the apex court to suspend the operation of the Lahore High Court verdict in the matter. Later, hearing of the matter was adjourned till January 11 (today)