Inter-Provincial Trade
Inter-Provincial Trade legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Any law which imposed financial burdens on the trade or impeded the flow of trade and commerce (between Provinces) was violative of Art.151 of the Constitution.
Article 151 of the Constitution enjoined all Inter-Provincial trade and commerce to be free and resided all power to legislate, and thereby to regulate, in the Parliament lest the freedom to trade and carry out commerce be shackled by the Provinces in any manner
Article 151 of the Constitution gave expression to the important concept of Federalism
Said Article was repository of the powers that were to vest in the Federal Government with regard to trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the country
By virtue of Art.151(2) of the Constitution such power had come to reside in the Parliament which, by law, could impose such restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse between one Province and another or within any part of Pakistan as may be required in the public interest
Provincial legislature was not empowered to enact a law which imposed such a restriction and it was with this intention that Art.151(1) stated in emphatic terms that the trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the country shall be free.
Where there was commerce which concerned more Provinces than one, the power to regulate the same laid with the Parliament and a Province could not regulate such activity
Commercial activities which were completely within a province, were the only ones immune from federal power; the rest must yield in favour of federal commerce power.
Similarities and distinction between Art.151 of the Constitution of Pakistan and S. 8 of Art. 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Any law which imposed financial burdens on the trade or impeded the flow of trade and commerce (between Provinces) was violative of Art.151 of the Constitution.
Article 151 of the Constitution enjoined all Inter-Provincial trade and commerce to be free and resided all power to legislate, and thereby to regulate, in the Parliament lest the freedom to trade and carry out commerce be shackled by the Provinces in any manner
Article 151 of the Constitution gave expression to the important concept of Federalism
Said Article was repository of the powers that were to vest in the Federal Government with regard to trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the country
By virtue of Art.151(2) of the Constitution such power had come to reside in the Parliament which, by law, could impose such restrictions on the freedom of trace, commerce or intercourse between one Province and another or within any part of Pakistan as may be required in the public interest
Provincial legislature was not empowered to enact a law which imposed such a restriction and it was with this intention that Art.151(1) stated in emphatic terms that the trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the country shall be free.
Where there was commerce which concerned more Provinces than one, the power to regulate the same laid with the Parliament and a Province could not regulate such activity
Commercial activities which were completely within a province, were the only ones immune from federal power; the rest must yield in favour of federal commerce power.
Similarities and distinction between Art.151 of the Constitution of Pakistan and S. 8 of Art. 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Inter-Provincial Trade - Regulation of by Government desirable-(Betel-leaf trade).
"Inter-Provincial Trade", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22266
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Inter-Provincial Trade"
1991 M L D 715
MIRPURKHAS SUGAR MILLS LIMITED — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT COUNCIL, THARPARKAR through Chairman and 3 others — Respondents
Court: KarachiP L
STAR FLOUR MILLS ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others ‑‑‑ Respondents
Court:2003 C L C 649
Messrs H.A. RAHIM & SONS (PVT.) LTD. ‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH and another‑‑‑Defendants
Court: KarachiP L D ,1982 Lahore 109
ARSHAD AKRAM & CO. AND 8 others‑Petitioners Versus DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS,
Court: Para. 1(b), West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act (XX of 1958), S. 3 & Punjab Government Notification No. SOF‑11 (484)‑B; 79, dated 3‑10‑1979 (together with its Explanatory para.) read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 151‑Inter‑provincial trade‑Ban on movement of rice‑Vires of notification‑Export from custom frontiers and inter‑provincial trade and commerce‑Federal Legislature alone empowered to make laws on subject and executive orders in such respect could be issued only by Federal Government‑Punjab Paddy and Rice (Control) Order, 1978‑Confined only to controlled area and has no extra‑territorial operation‑Nothing in such order provides for control of movement of rice once it goes out of limits of controlled area under a valid permit‑Nor can Foodstuffs (Control) Act 1958, much less any notification issued thereunder, confer a mandate on Provincial Government to issue any order calculated to impede free flow of trade and commerce between different provinces or hamper movement of goods from one Province to another impugned notification banning movement of rice not having been issued with consent of President of Pakistan under sub‑Article (4) of Art. 151 of Constitution of Pakistan (1973), held, hit by Art. 151 of Constitution and therefore ultra vires‑Provincial Government, held further, can control only intra‑provincial and not inter‑provincial movement of rice.‑Vires of legislation.P L D 1966 Dacca 138
MESSRS SHALIMAR PICTURES, DACCA — Petitioner Versus THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CUSTOMS OFFICE,
Court:1998 S C M R 2492
SHAHTAJ SUGAR MILLS LTD. and 3 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1965 Dacca 156
Haji GHULAM ZAMIN AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus A. B. KHONDKAR AND OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: Arts. 2, 6(2), 131 & 142(1) Legislative power‑Executive power ‑ Legislative power vests exclusively in Legislature‑No power inherent in Executive, "except that vested in it by law"‑Article 2, embodies principle of "due course of law"‑Inter‑Provincial trade exclusive responsibility of Central Legislature‑Execution of legislative provisions, with regard to such trade, primary responsibility of Central Government Executive authority‑Must be derived from law‑Central Government (Commerce Ministry) notification re inter‑Provincial betel‑leaf trade, purporting to "regulate" such trade‑"Regulation", function of Legislature not of Executive‑Adjudication of contests as to what amounts to "regulation", function of Judiciary‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Third Schedule, item (S)‑Inter‑Provincial Trade Ordinance (IV of 1964)‑Muhammad Hossain v. General Manager, E. B. Railway P L D 1961 Dacca 730 and Halsbury's Laws of England, (Hailsham Edition), Volume VI, paras. 424, 425 ref.P L D 2017 Lahore 230
MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED through Chief Executive — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and others — Respondents
Court: High Court2017 P T D 283
MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED through Chief Executive Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Chief Secretary and 2 others
Court: Lahore High Court2003 P T D 2140
MURREE BREWERY COMPANY LTD. through Secretary Versus PROVINCE OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary, Excise and Taxation, Quetta
Court: Quetta High Court