1990 PLP 1406 (CLC)

The petitioner, an Advocate of this Court filed this Constitution petition, with the assertions that approximately 50,000 tons of unwholesome dried milk contaminated with atomic radiation due to leakage in the nuclear plant at Chernobyl (U.S S.R.) was imported via Karachi; that this milk was found dangerous for human consumption by P.C.S.I.R./other analyzing agencies; that Mr. Hakim Ali Zardari respondent No.9 and unknown others abused their power and unlawfully prevailed upon other respondents to allow the importation and release of the dangerously contaminated milk; that other respondents, namely, Province of Punjab, respondent No.2, Municipal Corporation Lahore, respondent No.3 and the District Health Officer, Lahore, respondent No.4, did nothing to prevent its distribution and sale specially in Lahore where the petitioner and his family reside; that sale and distribution of the contaminated milk is violative of the provisions contained in Rule 18 of the Pure Food Rules 1965 and sections 272, 273, Pakistan Penal Code; and that an emergent situation has been created by the failure of the respondents to perform their duties diligently and honestly. It is also asserted that it is a matter of prime national importance as nuclearly contaminated milk Chernobyl due to incident has been made a source of profiteering by some powerful, sanctimonious‑sounding high‑ups and that the petitioner has a substantial interest in the matter as his life as well as that of his family and other citizens has been endangered. The petitioner on the basis of these assertions has prayed for the following directions and reliefs:‑ (a) order the respondents to reveal and explain how much milk was imported, when, why and on whose orders or persuasion it was released and to whom it was supplied since 1st of January, 1989; (b) respondents be directed to file with the Court, Chemical report of aforementioned milk and the Court may order the Public Analyst, Punjab, to carry out analysis of the dried milk and milk products and that the respondents be ordered to take immediate legal action to prevent sale, marketing and consumption of milk or milk products made with the said contaminated milk, and (c) the Attorney‑General and Advocate‑General be commanded to initiate proceedings under Sections 272 and 273 P.P.C. against the culprits, their aiders and abettors. In this petition, the parties persons arrayed as respondents are the Federation, the Province of Punjab, the Collector of Customs, Lahore, Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of Punjab, Chemical Examiner (Punjab), District Health Officer, Lahore; District Food Controller, Lahore, The Corporation of Lahore and Mr. Hakim Ali Zardari, M.NA.

2. Learned counsel on the first date of hearing submitted that the milk, imported under political pressure from Holland was found contaminated with atomic radiation as a result of nuclear leakeage in Chernobyl (U.S.S.R.) and though objection to the sale of contaminated milk for human consumption was publicly raised by writing Editorial Notes in the Newspapers yet the Government‑ Federal as well as Provincial and the statutory functionaries have not taken any action to stop the sale and consumption of this milk. Learned counsel further submitted that analysis was conducted either by Pakistan Institute of Sciences and Technology or P.C.S.I.R. or Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, Islamabad, and the imported milk was declared unfit for human consumption. In view of the public importance of the issue raised, this Court directed the aforesaid three Agencies to submit copy of the analysis report if any such analysis was conducted by any of them.

3. Mr. Muhammad Nasim, Director, Directorate of Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection, Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, Islamabad, placed on record a copy of the report and other correspondence exchanged between the Commission and the Customs Authorities. He pointed out that in Memo dated 31‑1‑1989 the result of analysis conveyed was that the samples of imported skimmed milk power contain 125Bq of Cesium 13'7 per kilogram which conforms to FA.O. Standard and as such the consignment is not fit for human consumption. In view of aforesaid report' learned Standing Counsel for Federation Qureshi Muhammad Hafiz was called and was asked to receive instructions and put in appearance on behalf of the Federation, if he so likes.

4. The parawise comments alongwith the supporting documents were filed on behalf of the Federal Government and the learned Standing Counsel also addressed lengthy arguments. Mr. Maqhool Elahi Malik, Advocate‑General presented the point of view of the Provincial Government. Mr. Mahmood Zaman, Advocate as has been appearing on behalf of Atomic Energy Commission of his own on all the dates of hearing, was also heard with respect to the functions and the duties of the Commission, under the Pakistan Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Ordinance 1984, (Ordinance IV of 1984) as the parties had in their submissions discussed, commented and criticised the role of the Commission in respect of the contaminated milk and its alleged failure to seize the milk. Mr. Mahmood Zaman, Advocate, placed on record a note explaining the position of the Commission as to the prescribing of limits on the Radioactive contamination in Food Items and framing of Regulations on Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection in exercise of powers and in the performance of functions assigned to the Commission under the aforesaid statute. At this stage, it may be noted that as the learned counsel for the Federation, Province and the Commission not only entered appearance at the admission stage but also attended the proceedings on all the dates of hearing and submitted detailed arguments, they were informed that the petition will be treated as having been admitted as against them.

5. Before proceeding further it is appropriate to notice the following applications submitted by the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings:‑ (i) application dated 5‑9‑1989 to implead Muhammad Ashraf Ismail, the importer of the milk and the Chief Pinstech Nellore, Islamabad; (ii) Application dated 16‑9‑1989 for adding Chairman, Central Board of Revenue and one Muhammad Hanif Malik, who allegedly had purchased the disputed milk; and (iii) Application dated 26‑9‑1989 for permission to place on record documents and cite more precedents and also for change of the name of petitioner from Riaz Ahmad to Maulana Riazur Rehman. The present proceedings are not appropriate proceedings as regards the matter of change of name is concerned. This application in other respects stands fructified as the learned counsel has addressed the arguments, cited the precedents and referred to the documents placed on record. The other two applications will stand disposed of with the order that I propose to pass in this case.

6. Mr. Maqbool Elahi Malik, Advocate‑General Punjab supported the petitioner and submitted that though the pleadings are not strictly in conformity with the procedural requirement yet this Court should in view of the public importance of the issue raised, issue necessary directions so as to secure and safeguard the health and life of the citizens. He added that as the Collector of Customs has released contaminated milk, which is likely to harm health and life of the citizens, illegally ignoring the Analysis re0ort and the Action level prescribed by the Commission, this Court should declare that the said illegal order would not be a bar for the Provincial authorities to seize the contaminated milk under Food Laws and also to register criminal cases against parties/persons responsible for import/release and sale of the contaminated milk. He added that order of Collector is illegal as the release was ordered without obtaining certificate as to fitness of the milk for human consumption from the manufacturer or "of the relevant authority in the country of origin, and that milk powder produced in 1986 was allowed to be imported in 1989 though expiry period of milk is 2/3 years. He submitted that Atomic Energy Commission may, therefore, be directed to seize the contaminated milk in exercise of pciwers vesting under section 4 of Ordinance IV of 1984 and to have cases instituted under section 9 of the aforesaid Ordinance. Learned Advocate‑General further submitted that the contaminated milk was got released through the influence of the high‑ups as otherwise the Customs Authorities had refused to release the contaminated milk on receipt of the report of the Atomic Energy Commission declaring the milk not fit for human consumption. Learned Advocate‑General placed on record Handouts issued by the Punjab Government warning the public in general of the harmful effects of the contaminated milk and instructing the Department of Food to seize the Frico brand milk wherever it is found. He added that the Punjab. Government through advertisement in the Press has also offered to purchase the milk from the parties/traders, who have purchased the milk from the importers. According to him all this was done by the Punjab Government in the interest of health and safety of the citizens. Learned Advocate‑General submitted that this was all that the Provincial Government could do after the release of the contaminated milk by the Collector (Customs), a functionary of the Federal Government.

7. Mr. Mohammad Hafiz Qureshi opposing the petition argued that the assertions made in the petition are so sketchy and vague that the same cannot be made basis for seeking any declaration or order by invoking Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. He added that the orders and the declarations that the learned Advocate‑General is seeking from the Court through his oral submissions have no nexus with the averments made in the petition. According to him, the petitioner in his petition is talking of some milk which cannot be taken as that milk respecting which the order dated 13‑7‑1989 was passed by the Court and that the milk of Holland origin imported from Singapore is altogether different milk. On the aforesaid assumption, it was argued that three different proceedings are being held. It was next contended that neither any relief has been claimed against the Federation nor the Collector (Customs) Karachi, who released the milk has been impleaded as a respondent nor the order releasing the milk has been assailed in this petition, and as such no relief can be granted by this Court suo Motu against any of them. If was added that respondents Nos. 2 to 4, 7 and 8 are ether the Provincial Government or the functionaries of the Provincial Government, who in spite of the information have not seized the so‑called contaminated milk despite the instructions given and the handouts issued in the Press. He added that if all that which can be done under the law has already been done by the Provincial Government, there remains no justification to seek any further order or direction. It was further argued that the petitioner has no locus standi to maintain this petition, and that the proceedings initiated through this petition do not qualify to be treated as "public interest litigation".

8. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the milk of Holland origin imported from Singapore was released by the Collector (Customs) after recording the conclusion that the same was not dangerous to human life and health and that in any case the Federal Government cannot be accused of any in action or any dereliction of duty in not safeguarding the life and health of the citizens. He submitted that three consignments had arrived from Singapore of the milk of Holland origin. The first consignment of 199.1 metric tons in 7,964 bags arrived Karachi on 15‑10‑1988, the second consignment of milk weighing 140 metric tons in 5,600 bags arrived Karachi on 2‑11‑1988 and the third consignment of 55.25 metric tons in 2,210 bags arrived Karachi on 21‑11‑1988 and that 95% milk was released during the months of October to December, 1988. On the basis of the aforenoted facts it was urged that 95% milk was got released at the time when the present Government had not yet taken over the reigns of the Government, and that the milk, which had not yet been released was seized on receipt of a complaint and notice under section 171 Customs Act was then issued to the importer on 28‑12‑1988: The seizure notice was challenged by the party concerned before the Sindh High Court, Karachi, and the same was quashed by the High Court with the direction that the question of release of milk be decided expeditiously. Thereafter the Collector vide order dated 4‑6‑1989 released the milk after recording inter alia the finding that the radio‑active contamination per kg. in the form when it will be reconstituted and ready for consumption will be far below the I.R.A.L.F. adopted level and thus comes within the safety limits for human consumption. Learned Standing Counsel also referred to the Chemical Formulary and stated that in case of dried powdered milk different levels have been fixed by different countries and that the Atomic Energy Commission in its present report in para 8 at page 3 of the report has stated as follows:‑ "Decision regarding unfitness of milk samples in concentrated form for human consumption was only in relation to the limits adopted by Atomic Energy Commission but it does not necessarily mean that it would be unsafe or injurious for consumption after dilution." On the above premises it was argued that the petitioner as well as the Provincial Government have unnecessarily raised the present controversy as the milk is not injurious to health and is not unfit for human consumption. He referred to laboratory test report dated 3‑1‑1989 produced by the importer and also the letter from the office of the Ombudsman whereby after receiving reply from the Customs authorities the complaint made was filed. Learned Standing Counsel further argued that the allegation that Mr. Hakim Ali Zardari had facilitated the release of the imported milk is imaginary as no basis for making this wild allegation has been disclosed and as such no basis exists for the Court to enquire into any such allegation. The learned counsel also cited precedents in support of the pleas that only an "aggrieved party" can maintain a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution (Miss Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan and another (P L D 1988 SC 416) that this Court cannot issue directions suo motu (Shahnaz Begum v. The Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Sindh and Balochistan (P L D 1971 SC 677) or on the move made problem public and that the relief is to flow from the pleadings and the averments made and that relief to be granted should follow as legal result from the right alleged and found (Pakistan v. Ali Afzal etc. PLD 1960SC1).

9. In reply learned counsel for the petitioner cited Paras 189 and 190, Vol. 73‑A of Corpus Jerus Secundum in support of the plea that the petitioner is an "aggrieved person" and has the necessary locus standi to maintain the petition. He also referred to certain passages from Lord Denning's Book "the Judge and the Law" on the subject of "abuse of discretion" and "Aggrieved party". Learned counsel for the parties also cited judgments in Miss Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan and another (P L D 1988 SC 416), Mohammad Anwar Durrani v. Province of Balochistan (P L D 1989 Quetta 25), (Abdullah Mohammad Peer Mohammad v. Karachi Municipal Corporation (P L D 1971 SC 130), Nisar Ahmad and 2 others (1979 S C M R 299), Haji Muhammad Ismail etc. v. Government of the Punjab and 13 others (1987 M L D 2457) Adeeb Jawedani v. Chief Administrator Auqaf etc. P L D 1987 Lah.

286. On "public interest litigation" and in support of their respective pleas whether or not petition qualifies to be treated as public interest litigation, the cases cited were: A I R 1981 SC (Supplementary) 87 (115), People's Union for Democratic Rights and others v. Unions of India and others (A I R 1982 SC 1473), Muhammad Javid Malik v. Government of Pakistan etc. (1989 M L D 2192).

10. I have given serious consideration to the respective pleas of the parties. The plea that petitioner is not an aggrieved person and as such has no locus standi to maintain the petition is without merit. In the case of Fazal Din v. Lahore Improvement Trust (P L D 1969 SC 223), Mr. Justice Hamoodur Rehman, the then Chief Justice observed:‑ "The right considered sufficient for maintaining a proceedings in writ jurisdiction is not necessarily a right 'in the strict juristic sense but it is enough if the applicant discloses that he had a personal interest in the performance of the legal duty which if not performed or performed in a manner not permitted by law would result in the loss of some personal benefit or advantage or the curtailment of privilege or liberty or franchise." The emphasis is on the existence of personal interest in the performance of legal duty by the statutory functionaries but I may add that it would be wrong to treat it standing as a preliminary or threshold matter independent of the merits of the complaint made and the reliefs prayed for. The complaint in nutshell is that contaminated milk unfit for human consumption was got released through political influence illegally and unauthorisedly and the statutory functionaries A have failed to discharge their legal duty by not preventing the import, distribution and sale of the unwholesome milk with the result that the health and life of not only the petitioner and his family members but also of his fellow citizens is likely to suffer due to the use of the contaminated milk and its by products. So existence of personal interest in the performance of legal duty in favour of petitioner if it is established that the milk is contaminated cannot be denied. The petitioner has thus the necessary locus standi to maintain the petition.

11. The plea of the learned Standing Counsel that three different milks appear to be subject‑matter of this petition is without any basis, though he is correct in pointing out that the assertions made in the petition are wanizag in many respects. The averments made read with the submissions noted in the order dated 30th July, 1989 pointedly refer to the unwholesome milk imported via Karachi which was contaminated with the effects of nuclear leakage in Chernobyl (U.S.S.R.) and which was found unfit for human consumption by P.C.S.I.R. or Pakistan Institute of Science and Technology or Atomic Energy Commission etc. It was due to these averments that aforesaid Agencies were directed to file analysis Report if analysis of such an imported milk was conducted by them. The report was filed by the Directorate of N.S & R.P. of Atomic Energy Commission and then the learned Standing Counsel himself filed a copy of the order dated 4th June, 1989 passed by the Collector (Customs). Thus, it was one and the camp milk, the milk of Holland origin imported via Karachi from Singapore which was got analysed and which was commented upon in Press is the subject‑matter of the petition. The confusion if any existing in the mind of the learned Standing Counsel was however cleared at the very outset when this plea was advanced.

12. The question whether the objected to milk was found unfit for human consumption and which is the authority whose decision under law is to prevail may now be gone into.

13. The facts which emerge despite the positions taken by the parties are that skimmed milk of Holland origin imported from Singapore was released by the Collector (Customs) Karachi vide order, dated 4th June 1989 recording the observation that "as far as the use of this milk powder in the concentrated form is concerned, it cannot be used in confectionary, ice‑cream etc., without a minimum dilution ratio of 1: 6 as otherwise it becomes lumpy and unsuitable for use. Even in such a condition the radio‑active contamination level will be only 20.8 Sq. per kg. This means that the radio‑active contamination per kg. in the form when it will be reconstituted and ready for consumption is far below the I.R.A.L.F. adopted and comes within the safety limits for human consumption." Before passing this order, the analysis report on the milk samples analysed by the Directorate of Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission received by the Collector reads as follows:‑‑‑ "The subject samples have been found to contain Cesium 137 (CS‑137). The average concentration of CS‑137 per kg. is 125 Bq. while the Pakistan Standard is 100 Bq. per kg. It may be pointed out that Pakistan Standard is exactly the same as F.A.O. Standard. In view of above the consignment under reference is considered unfit for human consumption." The Collector (Customs) thereafter sought the clarification by asking the question "when the milk powder diluted in proportion of 1 Part to 10 Parts water i.e. in a state ready for consumption would render it safe, and will it fall within permissible limits when action level in this milk powder is 125 Bq. kg." The Directorate in reply to the telex of the Collector (Customs) Karachi further reported vide its telex, dated 4th June, 1989 as under: "The dilution/reconstitution of skimmed milk powder containing 125 Bq. per kg. in a proportion of I part to 10 parts water for consumption will render it safe but the question arises how it will be ensured that the milk powder from this consignment shall not be used in confectionary and ice- cream etc. where it is used in concentrated form. These matters should be clarified first and the mechanism of control should be intimated to us for further consideration." The plea of the importer before the Collector was that although the directorate of N.S. and R Protection has adopted the level of 100 Bq. per kg. but this standard was not prescribed by issuing a notification and that Pakistan Standards Institution Karachi has also not prescribed any Pakistani Standard of Radio Nuclide Action Levels. It was further pointed out that even at 9th Session of Agricultural and Food Products Divisional Council held on 1st and 2nd April 1989 only an Expert Committee was constituted to study and prescribe permissible radio nuclide action levels for each category of foodstuffs. Learned Standing Counsel affirmed the aforestated position by stating after receiving instructions that the said Committee had not yet concluded its deliberations.

14. It is apparent from above that non‑prescription of the action level standard by Pakistan Standards Institution and non‑issuance of notification prescribing action level standard by the Pakistan Energy Commmission are the grounds taken for contending that the imported milk was not injurious to human health when used in diluted and ready for consumption form, and that even in concentrated form there is no cause for alarm as different countries have prescribed different action levels and now W.H.O./Codex Alimentarius Commission for milk and infant foods has adopted 1000 Bq. per Kg. for Caesium. Reference was made to News letter dated 1st September, 1989 of International Atomic Energy Agency.

15. The stand taken by the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission is that the Commission in 1987 adopted the interim recommended limits by FA.O. for radiation contamination in Food items, considering the large safety margin inherent in these limits (i.e. 100 Bq. kg. for C.S. 137) pursuant to the powers vesting under section 4 of aforesaid Ordinance IV of 1984 and the Ministry of Food and Agriculture‑was informed accordingly under Memo. No. DNSRP 13 (13)/87 (IV) dated 12‑8‑1987. In this letter Ministry was asked to require the importer to produce radiation free certificate from relevant authority in the country of origin. The Commission in the note submitted to the Court has submitted that interim limits have been under constant review by the international agencies (F.A.O., I.A.EA. W.H.O. CA.C.) and the matter is under examination of the Commission and till the decision on the revised limits, the already adopted limits, be notified if necessary.

16. As regards framing of regulations on Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection in exercise of powers vesting under section 8 of the said Ordinance, it was explained that the draft regulations for different matters including prescription of radionuclide contamination levels and regulations for import, storage and sale of food articles including requirement of certification from the country of origin, have been framed and will be notified, after the consultation is complete, with the approval of the competent authority.

17. The position which emerges is that the Commission has prescribed national Action Levels for Radionuclide contamination in Food items in 1987 and the Ministry was also informed as early as 12th August 1987. But the question is whether the National Action Levels adopted are to be notified to be effective in law. The law on the subject is Pakistan Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Ordinance 1984 (No. IV of 1984). Section 3 provides that this Ordinance shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force. Section 4 provides for the powers of the Commission as follows:‑‑ "

4. Powers of the Commission etc.‑‑(1) For the purpose of controlling, regulating and supervising all matters related to nuclear safety and rediation protection measures the Commission shall have the power to‑‑ (a) make and enforce such regulations, orders or codes of practice for nuclear safety and radiation protection as may in its opinion be necessary; (h) advise Government departments, educational and research institutions, public or private industry and other undertakings on questions related to nuclear safety and radiation protection; .... Section 5 provides for issuing of Licences required for carrying out certain activities including manufacture, sale, distribution or otherwise disposal of food that has been treated or contaminated by ionizing radiation. The Commission has the power under Section 7 of the Ordinance to designate any person as Inspector who may direct such actions to be taken to protect the health and safety of public and the envirornment as may be specified in the regulations from time to time, The power to make regulations by notifying them in the official Gazette vests in the Commission under Section 8 of the Ordinance. So for enforcement of the Regulations notification in the official Gazette is necessary and not for the making of the orders or codes of practices for nuclear safety and radiation protection. The national nuclide action levels in food items prescribed by the Commission would thus be effective even without a Gazette Notification notwithstanding Radionuclide action levels fixed or adopted by other countries or International Agencies. The standard declared or adopted by the Commission will also be binding on the authorities acting under other laws as the order passed, regulations made or standard prescribed in exercise of the powers vesting under the Ordinance is to prevail as the Ordinance has overriding effect as against anything provided in any other law. It is further apparent that in respect of powers and functions to be exercised and performed by the Commission, the aforesaid Experts Committee or the Pakistan Standard Institute has no role to play. These matters, however, were not noticed by the Collector (Customs) while passing the order, dated 4th of June, 1989.

18. The next question that arises is that now when the objected to milk has found its way in the market, what measures can legally be adopted by the authorities to stop its consumption by the citizens. Does the old saying, "there is no use crying over the spilt milk" apply to the situation with which we are presently faced. This question was asked to the learned counsel for the parties as the skimmed milk of Holland origin imported from Singapore since its release vide order dated 4th June, 1989 has already spilled into the bellies of consumers or has fallen into hands from where it cannot possibly be recovered. This question assumes importance as in spite of the issuance of a Handout by the Provincial Government calling upon parties/persons in possession of the contaminated Frico Brand Milk to deliver the same to the health authorities against payment of compensation price paid but admittedly none has availed of this offer. This is the position despite the issuance of another Handout to the effect that as the milk is injurious to human life and health, the wholesale dealers, Dairy owners and the manufacturers of milk products and the public should not use the radiation contaminated milk. Morevover, the stand of the Advocate‑General, which was not refuted by the learned counsel for the other parties, was that the aforesaid measures in law could at best be taken in the circumstances by the Provincial Government. If that is the position, then the question is, whether the reliefs and the directions prayed for by the petitioner and the Advocate‑General can be granted and made when neither the order, dated 4th June, 1989 of the Collector (Customs) releasing the objected to milk, has been challenged in the petition nor the Collector (Customs), nor the Importers have been impleaded as respondents to the petition. Learned Standing Counsel for the Federation also contended that the order of Collector (Customs) Karachi cannot either be challenged ‑before this Court as the said officer admittedly performs functions outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. The objection to the territorial jurisdiction apart, no relief can be granted against party which has not been impleaded and which has not been heard. This Court has the power to implead a necessary or proper party but in the instant case, I do not consider appropriate to implead the necessary parties as no useful purpose will be served for the reason that it will now not be C possible to trace the contaminated milk and whatever legal steps could legally be taken by the Punjab Government have been taken so as to prevent the consumption by citizens of the contaminated milk within the province of Punjab. This Court is concerned with the performance of legal duty by the functionaries, Federal and Provincial within Punjab, i.e. its territorial jurisdiction.

19. Moreover, this petition to extent of the reliefs asked, e.g. (1) respondents to reveal how much milk was imported and when, under whose orders and to whom it was released, and (ii) to file the analysis report stand fructified as this information and the report was provided during the proceedings. The relief as to registration of criminal cases under sections 272 and 273, P.P.C.against the culprits, abettors and aiders was sought on the assertion that respondent No.9 and unknown others abused their power by prevailing upon other respondents to allow the importation and release of the contaminated milk. These assertions are a not only wild but are also unspecific and vague and as such cannot even form basis of even executive enquiry what to say of forming basis of judicial enquiry and that too in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction. On the basis of such an allegation, no question arises of even requiring the respondent No.9 to enter D appearance in these proceedings. The relief sought or the direction as to lodging of enquiry cannot be granted or made in this petition. It may, however, be clarified that any observation made in this context would naturally not affect the enquiry if any instituted by the Federal Government in connection with the import or release of the milk or the power of the Federal Government to institute such an enquiry if otherwise considered appropriate.

20. Before parting with the judgment, I would like to observe that the Atomic Energy Commission has taken much time to frame and notify the Regulations under section 8 of the Ordinance. It is hoped that the draft Regulations will be approved and notified by the Commission as early as possible, and without awaiting for another Chernobyl incident to occur.

21. For the reasons given and in the circumstances noted above, no direction or order needs to be passed or issued by this Court. The petition thus stands disposed with no order as to cost. AA./R‑215/L Petition dismissed.