MLD 1994

1994 PLP 594 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD SHAHID IQBAL and another — Petitioners Versus M/s. CALTEX OIL (PAKISTAN) LIMITED through Area Manager and 5 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
1992-October-13
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1994 PLP 594 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD SHAHID IQBAL and another — Petitioners Versus M/s. CALTEX OIL (PAKISTAN) LIMITED through Area Manager and 5 others — Respondents
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 594 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 594 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 594 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD SHAHID IQBAL and another — Petitioners Versus M/s. CALTEX OIL (PAKISTAN) LIMITED through Area Manager and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • Muhammad Saleem Shehnazi for Petitioners.
  • Ghulam Muhammad for Respondent No.1.
  • A. Karim for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
  • Aftab Tqbal Chaudhry, Dy. Attorney-General for Pakistan for Respondents Nos.4 and 5.
  • Rana Muhammad Arshad, A.A: G., Punjab for Respondent No.6.

Headnotes / Summary

Art.199

Pakistan Petroleum (Refining, Blending and Marketing) Rules, 1971

Petitioners in their Constitutional petition had prayed that respondents were running a petrol pump without obtaining explosive licence under Petroleum Act, 1934 and Petroleum Rules, 1937, which was in violation of the Act and the relevant Rules and as such directions be issued to Authorities to take action against respondents in that behalf

Respondents had sought dismissal of Constitutional petition against them on ground that Federal Government had amended Rules, 1971 with the result that permission to install a petroleum outlet, was no more required from Ministry of Petroleum

Petitioner did not deny or dispute amendment or its effect, but stated that said amendment had no effect qua the present petition inasmuch as prayer made by petitioners in their Constitutional petition was that respondents were running a petrol pump without obtaining explosive licence under relevant Act and Rules

Authorities stated that as matter was pending before Courts, Authorities had not taken any action

Assurance was given that if it was found by Authorities or brought to their notice that relevant Act or Rules were being violated, action would duly be taken by them in accordance with law

Petition was disposed of accordingly in view of such assurance.

Judgment & Decree

Respondents Nos.2 and 3 have filed C.M. No.2118 of 1992 for the dismissal of this. petition on the ground that the federal Government has amended the Pakistan Petroleum (Refining, Blending and Marketing) Rules, 1971 through Notification, dated 15th March, 1992, with the result that permission to install a petroleum outlet is no more required from Ministry of Petroleum.

2. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner does not deny or dispute the amendment made or its effect. He, however, states that the said amendment has no effect qua the present petition inasmuch as the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition is that respondents Nos.1 to 3 are running a petrol pump without obtaining explosive licence under the Petroleum Act, 1934 and the Petroleum Rules, 1937 which is in violation of the Act and a direction be issued to respondents Nos.4 and 5 to take action against the respondents Nos.1 and 3 in this behalf.

3. Mr.Aftab Iqbal Chaudhry, learned Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan, states that as the matter was pending before this Court, respondents have not taken any action. He, however, assures that if it is found by the respondents Nos.4 and 5 or brought to their notice that the Act or Rules are being violated action in accordance with law will be duly taken. In view of this assurance, this petition is not pressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and is disposed of accordingly. H.B.T./M-690/L . Order accordingly.