P L D 1961 (W (PLP)

S. A. MAHMOOD, J.--‑This writ petition by Messrs Sh. Mian Muhammad Allah Bakhsh Limited. Proprietors of Pakistan Flour and Oil Mills, G. T. Road, Peshawar, challenges the validity of the Government of West Pakistan, Food Department, Notification No. SOF (III)‑IV‑II/60, dated 20th August 1960, and prays that a writ of mandamus be issued to the Government of West Pakistan, respondent, not to enforce the directions contained therein, and, in the alternative, that the respondent may be directed to either purchase itself or to make arrangement for the disposal of maida, produced by the petitioner, at prices, which are the basis of Government estimates for fixing the price of atta at Rs. 16‑6‑0. 2. The Pakistan Flour and Oil Mills was established at Peshawar in 1952 and is the only mill supplying wheat flour to the one million people of that region. It is a roller flour mill and grinds about four thousands maunds of wheat daily. The respon dent claims that the total requirements of the District at the rate of six chittaks per head per day is about 9,832 maunds per day and that in order to cater for the needs of the local population and to prevent artificial scarcity of atta it was necessary in the public interest to call upon the petitioner‑company to work to full capacity, i.e., for 24 hours, which still left half the demand to be supple mented from Flour Mills at Lyallpur, Okara, Multan, Jarranwala and Sargodha and by local chakkis and water mills. The petitioner company impugns the notification as being illegal and ultra vires on the following grounds :‑ (a) That the notification purports to have been issued under section 4 (e) of the West Pakistan Flour Mills (Control) Order, 1959, which gives the Controller power only to regulate production, sale and delivery of wheat products, and does not at all confer any power on the Controller to order the petitioner's Mill to work for 24 hours ; (b) that even if it be assumed that he has the power, he cannot control working hours without making arrangements for disposal of all mill products as the relevant clause implies that the pro duction, sale and delivery of wheat products and not only atta can be regulated ; (c) that the directions contained in the notification are arbi trary, unreasonable and work prejudicially, and the result of the directions is the ruin of the petitioner inasmuch as instead of getting its legitimate charges, the company is daily losing Rs. 2,560, and the ultimate result shall be a liquidation of the Roller Flour Mills. In these circumstances, the petitioner company would like the mill not to operate rather than lose money every day ; (d) that the Provincial Government had failed to provide any distributing agency which should be prepared to purchase all the wheat products at the rates worked out by Government. The natural result is that the consumers purchase atta and leave the fines (maida), which had to be stored in the Mills in heaps and the company had four lacs worth of fines on its hands, because it could not be sold at more than Rs. 24 per maund and not at the Government prices ; (e) that the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Order, 1959, in so far as it provides for control generally of the pro duction of wheat and wheat products, is beyond the scope of the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958, as the Act does not provide for compulsory operation of the flour mills and fixation of their working hours ; (f) that the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958, ' and the West Pakistan Flour Mills (Control) Order, 1959, which were enforced when wheat and wheat products were controlled and rationed commodities had become obsolete with the aboli tion of the control, and is no longer enforceable. It was explained in the petition that the Roller Flour Mills were required to mill wheat so as to extract 88 per cent. atta, 8 per cent fines, i.e., maida, and 4 per cent. bran and that prices of these products had been calculated on the following basis :‑ Rs. a. p. 100 maunds wheat at Rs. 16 ... 1,600 0 0 Less cost of 36 bags (& Rs. 2 each ... 72 0 0 Without bags ... 1,528 0 0 SALE: Atta @ 88 @ Rs. 16‑6‑0 with bag ... 1,441 0 0 Fins 8 % @ Rs. 32 per maund ... 256 0 0 (according to Government's agreement ... with the Mills) Bran (a), 4 @ R s. 6 ... 24 0 0 1,721 0 0 Less cost of 48 bags at Rs. 2 per bag ... 96 0 0 1,625 0 0 Transportation from P. R. ... ... 12 8 0 1,612 8 0 Less expenditure ... ... 1,528 0 0 Milling margin ... ... 84 8 0 It was alleged that as there was very little demand for fines, i.e., maida, the best rate available for it was Rs. 60 per bag of 2 maunds, i.e., 24 per maund, and that the net milling margin avail able to the petitioner per hundred maunds of wheat at Peshawar was Rs. 20‑8‑0 and not Rs. 84‑8‑0 which was the basis on which Government's calculations were based for fixing the price of atta, this being the margin allowed by the Government to the petitioner in the days of monopoly procurement scheme, as As. 0/ 10/6 per maund were allowed as milling charges, and annas two per maund as profit. On this basis, it was calculated that by grinding 4,000 maunds of wheat per day the petitioner was suffering a loss of Rs. 2,560 per day as compared to the system prevailing during the monopoly procurement scheme, and the petitioner would prefer to step the Mill rather than work it at a loss. 3. The respondent denies the petitioner's allegations and contends that the notification is competent and within the scope of the authority conferred by the West Pakistan Flour Mills(Control) Order, 1959 (hereinafter called the Order), promulgated by the Governor of West Pakistan in exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act). 4. The petitioner's contention of daily loss of Rs. 2,560 is not the actual loss. As the milling margin now available to the petitioner per hundred maunds of wheat according to his calcu lation is Rs. 20‑8‑0 per hundred maunds and as under the previous system, the petitioner.was getting Rs. 84‑8‑0 per hundred maunds, it is calculated that the loss to him in 4,000 maunds of wheat is Rs. 2,560 per day. The milling margin of Rs. 20‑8‑0 is calculated on the basis of the maida selling for Rs. 24 per maund. The respondent has produced before us actual sale vouchers issued by the petitioner from the beginning of May 1960 to October 1960. From these vouchers it is clear that the petitioner sold maids at Rs. 30 per maund on 2nd of May 1960. The sale price rose to Rs. 38 in June 1960, when it started falling gradually and came down to Rs. 30 per maund in August 1960. It fell to Rs. 27 in September 1960, but again rose to Rs. 30 and again fell to Rs. 27‑3‑0 in October 1960. It is claimed by the respondent that the prevailing price of maida is now over Rs. 30 per maund. At the least selling price of Rs. 27 per maund of maids, the milling margin available to the petitioner works out at Rs. 44‑8‑0. With maida selling at Rs. 30 it rises to Rs. 68‑8‑0, calculated at the petitioner's figure of margin‑of Rs. 20‑8‑0, with maida selling at Rs. 24 per maund, because a hundred maunds of wheat, produces 8 maunds of maids. The petitioner had no complaint to make when the price of maida was Rs. 30 and above. The sale and the price of maida are not controlled and its price naturally fluctuates according to the supply and demand, but so far the petitioner has not suffered any actual loss at the prices at which maida was sold or could be sold. There is equally no force in the contention that the petitioner is not able to sell maida and large stocks of it are accumulating. The roller flour mill produces about 320 maunds of maida per day by milling four thousand maunds of wheat. The total stock of maida recently in the hands of the petitioner is stated to be a little above three thousand maunds, which is not more than ten days' production of maida by the flour mill. There is, therefore, no substance in the factual averments made in grounds (c) and (d) above. 5. This brings me to the legal aspect of the contentions raised by the petitioner. The West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act (XX of 1958) was promulgated on the 23rd of April 1958. According to section 2 of this Act, `foodstuffs' means any of the following classes of commodities :‑ "(i) wheat, atta, maida, rawa and suji. (ii) rice and paddy. (iii) sugar, and (iv) such other commodity or class of commodities as may be declared and notified by the Government to be foodstuffs for the purposes of this Act." Section 3 of the Act provides as under :‑ "Powers to control supply, distribution, etc., of foodstuffs :‑ (1) The Government, so far as it appears to it to be necessary or expedient for maintaining supplies of any foodstuffs or for securing its equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, may, by notified order, provide for regulating or‑prohibiting the Keeping storage, movement, transport, supply, distribution, disposal, acquisition, use consumption thereof and trade and commerce therin. (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the ferred by subsection (1) an order made thereunder provide :‑ (a) for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise the manufacture of any article of food from any foodstuffs ; (b) for controlling the prices at which any foodstuff may bought or sold ; (c) for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise, the storage, transport, distribution, disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of any foodstuff ; (d) for prohibiting the withholding from. sale of any foodstuff, ordinarily kept for sale ; (e) for requiring any person holding stock of any foodstuff to sell the whole or a specified part of the stock to such persons or class of persons or in such circumstances as may be specified in the Order ; (f) for regulating or prohibiting any class of commercial or finding transactions relating to any foodstuff which, in the opinion of the authority making the order is, or is likely to be detrimental to public interest ; (g) for collecting any information or statistics with a view to regulating or prohibiting any of the aforesaid matters ; (h) for requiring persons engaged in the supply or distribution of, or trade or commerce in, any foodstuffs to maintain and produce for inspection such books, accounts and records relating to their business and to furnish such information relating thereto as may be specified in the order ; and (i) for any incidental and supplementary matters including, in particular, the entering and‑ search of premises, vehicles, vessels and aircraft, the seizure by a person authorised to make such search of any articles in respect of which such person has reason to believe that a contravention of the Order has been, is being, of is about to be committed, or any records connected therewith the grant or issue of licences, permits or other docu ments, and the charging of fees therefor." In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the West Pakis tan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958, the Governor of West Pakistan promulgated West. Pakistan Flour Mills (Control) Order, 1959, with effect from 24th April 1959. `Producer' is defined in its clause (c) of section 2 as a person carrying on the business of cleaning or milling of wheat or the manufacture of wheat products with the aid of flour mills, and "Flour Mill" is defined in its clause (b) of the section as a mill where the business of cleaning or milling of wheat or the manufacture of wheat products is carried on with the aid on electrical or any other form of Mechanical energy, excluding human or animal energy. Section of the Order provides as under :‑ "4. The Controller may, from time to time, direct the producers generally or any producer in particular‑ (a) to procure or purchase wheat from such sources or suc places or areas as may be specified ; (b) to manufacture such wheat products or to limit the manufacture thereof to such quantities or varieties or not to manufacture such wheat products as may be specified ; (c) to supply such wheat products to such area, market person or class of persons or organisation in such quantities and in such manner as may be specified ; (d) to charge for cleaning or milling of wheat at such rate, as may be specified ; and (e) generally to regulate production, sale and delivery of wheat products." 6. Thus, under section 3 of the Act, the Government was authorised to provide by notified order, as it appeared to be necessary or expedient for maintaining supplies of foodstuffs, 'or for securing its equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, for regulating or prohibiting the keeping, storage, movement, transport, supply, distribution, disposal, acquisition, use or con sumption thereof and trade and commerce therein. Under the power conferred by the Act, the Government has authorised the Controller, i.e., the Director of Food, West Pakistan, under section 4 of the Order to direct the producers generally or in particular (a) to procure or purchase wheat from such sources or such places or areas as may be specified ; (b) to manufacture such wheat products ; (c) to supply such wheat products to such area, market, person or class of persons or organisation in the specified quantities and in the specified manner ; (d) to charge for cleaning or milling of wheat at such rates as may be specified and (e) generally to regulate production, sale and delivery of wheat products. The notification, which has been impugned in this case, i.e., Notification No. SOF (III)‑IV‑11/60, dated the 20th of August 1960, was promulgated under para. 4 (e) of the Order. It provides as follows :‑ "In exercise of the powers conferred on me by paragraph 4 (e) of the West Pakistan Flour Mills (Control) Order, 1959, I, Abdul Hamid, Director Food and Additional Secretary to Government, West Pakistan, Food Department, hereby direct the Manager, Pakistan Flour & Oil Mills, Peshawar, to carry out 24 hours milling of atta daily with immediate effect." By this notification the Pakistan Flour & Oil Mills, Peshawar, has been ordered to work the mill for 24 hours for milling of atta. This notification is impugned in substance on the ground that the Controller is not authorised to order the petitioner to work the mills for 24 hours, that the order is beyond the scope of the Act and that it has become obsolete and unenforceable with the abolition of monopoly procurement scheme and of the control on wheat. Thus, the validity and competency of the Act is not impugned. It is the validity of the Order and the notification made under it which is challenged. 7. The first question which falls for determination is whether the Order is intra vires and within the competency of the Govern ment in the exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of the Act. The Order is a piece of conditional legislation and is intended to carry out the objects specified in the Act. The various purposes for which the Government is authorised to make orders by a notification is stated in the Act. Keeping in view the purposes of the Act, I have no doubt that the order is within the scope of the power conferred on the Govern ment by section 3 of the Act. The Order authorises the Con troller to direct a producer to do the various things specified in it and stated above, and the powers conferred on him are not outside the purposes of the, Act, nor was this contended before us in arguments. The powers conferred on the Controller are necessary for the purposes of carrying out the objects of the Act. The Order is a piece of conditional legislation and is not incom petent on the ground of the Legislature having abrogated its powers and functions to the Government. Delegation of powers by the Legislature to an outside agency has become necessary in modern times, as it is difficult to fill up all the details or to think out and the eventualities which may have to be met, and, therefore, not infrequently power is conferred on the Government or an outside agency to fill in the details within the framework of the authority conferred. "The difficulty" observed Cornelius, J. (now Chie Justice of Pakistan) in Sobho Gyanchandani v. The State (P L D 1952 F C 29) is one "which, under the increasing complexity of modern conditions, is felt by all legislatures in making provision for every case which may arise within the contemplation of the statute, renders it necessary for measures of ancillary powers to be delegated to the executive authorities to make statutory rules and regulations for carrying into effect the provision of the statute in matters of detail. Delegation to this extent has been universel practice for a great many years and such provision will be found to a great number of statutes. A leading authority on this point is Archibald G. Hodge v. Queen (1884 A C Vol. 9 p. 117)." The Act gave power to the Government to make ancillary provisions for maintaining supplies and for other matters specified in it, and the Order being a measure for carrying into effect the provisions of the statute in the matter of detail is not a provision beyond the scope and limit of the authority conferred by the Act on the Government. 8. It cannot be denied that in recent years there has been shortage of foodstuffs in the country because of large influx of people, their changing habits, and increase in population and this has necessitated the maintenance of control on supply, distribution and price of wheat and wheat products. The Government for some time past has been procuring all the wheat produced in the country and has also been importing wheat from outside. As it was the sole monopolist of the wheat produced in the country, the monopoly procurement scheme was enforced, whereby the Government supplied wheat to the flour mills and obtained atta back from them, selling the fines to the mills at agreed rates, which they were entitled to dispose of. The aKa milled by the various flour mills was sold by the Government to the public through its various agencies and depots set up by the Food Department. This arrangement was terminated about the end of April 1960 and the movement as well as the sale and price of the wheat in the market was decontrolled. The new system was to come into force from 1st of May 1960. Since then, the Government, with a view to maintain prices of atta at a reasonable level, has been supplying wheat from its own stocks of imported wheat at Rs. 16 per maund. 9. Martial Law Regulation No. 77 was enforced by the Chief Martial Law Administrator with effect from 1st of May 1960. Para. 3 thereof, which has been strongly relied upon by the learned Advocate General, is reproduced below:-- "3. (a) No owner or manager of a Roller Flour Mill‑ (1) shall purchase wheat except from the .Government of West Pakistan or from the place specified by that Government and in such quantities as the Government may in each case fix ; and (2) shall sell atta at rates in excess of the ex‑mill rates per maund (with bag) fixed by the Government of West Pakistan. (b) The owner or manager of every Roller Flour Mill‑ (1) shall adhere to the following extraction percentages :‑ Fines . . . . . . not exceeding 8 per cent. Bran . . . . . . not less than 4 per cent. or such other extraction percentage as the Government of West Pakistan may specify ; (2) shall submit to the District Food Controller on the 1st and 15th of each month, a statement in the form given in the schedule to this Regulation, and shall also forward a copy thereof to the official of the Department of Food in charge of the mill ; (3) shall, if so required by the Government of West Pakistan, regulate the distribution of supplies to any areas in accordance with the orders issued by the Government ; (4) shall on the demand by the Deputy Director or Assistant Director in charge of the Region or sub‑Region, as the case may be, or the District Food Controller or the official of the Food Department in charge of the mill, make available for inspection relevant record and information relating to the purchases, stocks and the milling of wheat and the disposal of wheat products ; (5) shall maintain and keep the premises of the mill and the compound or enclosure appurtenant thereto in a proper sanitary and hygienic condition ; and (6) shall produce atta in conformity with the standard laid down in the Punjab Pure Food Act, 1950." Para. 3 of the Regulation thus directs that an owner or manager of every Roller Flour Mill shall purchase wheat from the Govern ment of West Pakistan or from place specified by that Government and in such quantities as the Government may in each' case fix. In exercise of the powers conferred by this Regulation various notifications were issued from time to time by the Governor of West Pakistan. By Notification No. SOF‑III‑IV‑9/60/2152, dated the 22nd of April 1960, the Governor of West Pakistan, in exercise of powers conferred by clauses (a) and (b) of sub‑paragraph (1) of paragraph 3 of Martial Law Regulation No. 77, directed that all roller flour mills in West Pakistan shall purchase 50 % of its milling capacity on the basis of daily milling of 24 hours in the open market (provided that no flour mills shall at any time, keep in storage quantities of wheat in excess of their three months' requirement worked out on the aforesaid basis) and the remaining 50 % at Rs. 16 per maund from Government stocks. The sale price of atta was fixed at some places at Rs. 16‑6‑0 and at others at Rs. 16‑8‑0 per maund. The next Notification is No. SOF‑III‑IV 9/60/2413, dated 27th April 1960, which provided that the Roller Flour Mills as were not able to purchase indigenous wheat from the open market shall purchase their entire requirements of wheat from Government at the rate of Rs. 16 per maund and shall sell atta at the rate of Rs. 16‑6‑0 per maund. It is stated by the" learned Advocate‑General on behalf of the respondent and is not denied by the petitioner that this notification was issued at the request of the petitioner, so that sufficient supplies of wheat were available to the Pakistan Roller Flour Mills for running the mills for 24 hours, and the Government, agreeing thereto, issued this notification. This was followed by Notification No. SOF (III)‑IV‑9/60, dated 30th June 1960, directing the Roller Flour Mills in West Pakistan to purchase indigenous wheat in the open market not exceeding 25 % and the rest from Government stocks for their daily milling of 24 hours, and to produce flour in that proportion. ' The, place of purchase in the case of the mill was also specified. By notifications dated 9th August 1960, and 8th September 1960, the Governor of West Pakistan directed the various Roller Flour Mills to distribute the atta produced by them in the proportions and in the areas mentioned against their names. The Pakistan Roller Flour Mills, Peshawar, was directed to sell its entire production of atta within the Peshawar District. In this connection, it has been stated already that the atta pro duced by this mill fulfils only half the requirements of one million people which reside in that area and the rest of its requirements have to be met from other sources. There cannot be any doubt in these circumstances that it is necessary with a view to maintain supplies that the flour mills should work for 24 hours. If the mill stopped working or did not work for 24 hours, the supplies of atta for human consumption is bound to be affected seriously, which would lead to serious consequences. The direction in the impugned notification that the flour mill should work for 24 hours is necessary for maintaining supplies, and is an order which is competent in exercise of the power given by the Order and within B the four corners of the purposes of the Act, under which it has been enforced. Machinery is a valuable asset for the achievement of human objectives and its well being. It functions automati cally with the aid of oil, coal, gas or electricity and it often becomes necessary to order by legislation that it shall work for 24 hours. Instances of such legislation are common in countries over the world and there is no difficulty in holding that orders in this behalf can be made under the law. I am, therefore, clearly of the opinion that the notification in so far as it directs the mill to work for 24 hours, is competent. It falls clearly under clauses b and a of section 4 of the Order. 10. Though the notification on the face of it incompetent and is valid exercise of powers conferred by the Order, which has been validly made under the Act, the necessary incidence of the order is that the petitioner ‑has to buy large quantities of wheat for running the mill for 24 hours ; and the flour mill cannot be worked without being fed with wheat. Thus, a large amount of money has to be invested in carrying out the order. The question which has been raised and requires, decision is whether the notification is valid if in complying with the notified order wheat has to be purchased; which means also an investment of consider able capital. This involves the question whether a person or a C corporation can be forced to carry on a business trade or vocation. Regulation of human conduct in relation to business, trade and profession by law is of course permissible. The pro visions for closing of shops for a day in a week, the number of hours for which a factory shall be worked and the taking out a licence before a certain calling or profession can be entered into are examples of such legislation. It is also permissible to order by legislation that persons who are in certain professions, callings or business shall continue to perform their duties. The Essential Services Maintenance Ordinance, 1956 (Ordinance XVII of 1956) is an example of such a law and no one has doubted its validity. In some countries conscription has also been provided for by law, which entails service in the army for some years. Though the late Constitution guaranteed freedom of trade and profession, it permitted the imposition of reasonable restrictions and licensing systems in its Articles 11 and 12. Thus, in the complicated system obtaining today, where supplies have become short, the welfare of the society demands and necessitates a certain, amount of control on trade and industry and there can be no valid objec tion to it so long as the limits which are not well defined are not transgressed. Thus it would be permissible to regulate business, trade and vocation but businessman or firm cannot be compelled to invest capital in any trade, business or profession, if he or it does not want to do so. The impugned notified order assumes that the petitioner is ready and willing to buy wheat and go on milling it. If he has been and is so ready and willing to invest in and buy wheat and continue in business, a direction could be given to him to run the mill for 24 hours, but if he is not so willing, he cannot be forced to do so, though he has to keep the mill and its machinery in good working order so that if supplies of wheat are made avail able by anyone, he would mill it without objection at any hour of the day or night. This is the sense in which I interpret the notification dated the 20th August 1960. As the petitioner is in flour‑mill business, his conduct of the business can be regulated, He can be directed by the Controller under clause (a) of section 4 of the Order as a producer, to procure or purchase wheat from such sources or such places or areas as may he specified. The power conferred by the Order on the Controller to direct a producer to purchase or procure wheat is referable to the place or source of purchase from which the producer can buy if he wants to buy, but is not intended to compel him to purchase. The learned Advocate General relied on paragraph 3 of the Martial Law Regulation No. 77 promulgated by the Chief Martial Law Administrator and argued that thereby the producer had to purchase the required quantities of wheat, but the Regulation is not capable of the meaning which the learned Advocate‑General urged us to draw. It only directs that no owner or manager of a Roller Flour Mill shall purchase wheat except from the Government of West Pakistan or from places specified by that Government and in such quantities as the Government may in each case fix. It does not compel the owner or the manager of a Roller Flour Mill to purchase wheat, but regulates his buying, if he wants to buy and prescribes that the proportion in which he buys imported and indigenous wheat shad be, such as is pres cribed by the Government. It has been stated on behalf of the Government that the petitioner has been ready and willing to buy the requisite quantities of wheat and has never conveyed its reluctance to do so, and it is in this context that the Order has been issued for the purpose of maintaining supplies. The peti tioner's case is not that he has not had the capital or that wheat supply was not available to him to run the mill for 24 hours. The difficulty in the procurement of wheat has been met by the Government and the capital is available to the petitioner. It has been found as a fact that the petitioner was suffering no loss in running the mill under the present conditions. It was conceded before us on his behalf that no complaint has been' made by him to the Government that he was not willing to purchase the wheat or to invest the required capital. In the context of this situation, when the petitioner was ready and willing to perform the ancillary acts, the order was perfectly legal. The order in itself is not invalid. It does not direct that he must purchase wheat and thereby invest money in its purchase. Thus the question of illegality of the order on this ground does not exist. The import of the order has been made clear by me above, and if the circum stances have changed, it will be for the Government to make the necessary arrangements by an order or otherwise to meet the change. 11. It was argued on behalf of the respondent that the writ petition has been filed mala fide with a view to force the Govern ment to raise the price of maida to Rs. 32 per maund or the price of atta so that the petitioner can enrich himself at the cost of the consumer, but it is open to a firm or a business man to strive for securing the maximum amount of profit, and to curb such activities price can, of course, be regulated by law and other steps taken to regulate trade and business. The legislative power is vast, but the power conferred can only be exercised within the circumscribed limits, it has itself provided. No power is con ferred by the Act or the Order to direct a producer to buy specified quantities of wheat or to invest money in its purchase, Since these things have not been ordered, the order to the mill can only be interpreted as meaning that the petitioner should keep the mill in good order and it should be ready to work for 24 hours, required by anyone to mill wheat for 24 hours or at any if it is hour of the day or night. 12. In the light and context of what I have stated above, I hold that the order issued to the petitioner to work the mill for 24 hours is valid. This writ petition is dismissed, but I make no order as to costs. SHABIR AHMAD, J.‑I agree. A. H Petition dismissed.