|
|
|
| December 8, 2005 | Thursday | Ziqa’ad 5, 1426 |
New plea filed against OCAC composition
ISLAMABAD, Dec 7: Chairman of the Awami Himayat Tehrik Pakistan, Maulvi Iqbal Haider, on Wednesday filed a fresh a petition challenging the composition of the Oil Companies’ Advisory Committee (OCAC). Earlier, the Supreme Court had dismissed his petition as withdrawn and directed him to file an amended petition by properly challenging the composition of the OCAC and appointment of its secretary, who was not a public functionary.
The new petition seeks a declaration from the apex court that Section 2 (4b) of the Petroleum Products (Petroleum Development Levy) Ordinance 1961 is violative of Articles 90 (exercise of executive authority of the federation), 8 (laws inconsistent with or in derogation of fundamental rights to be void) and 9 (security of person) of the constitution.
The federal government, the petroleum secretary, chairman of the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority, the OCAC chairman, chief executive of Attock Petroleum, the country representative of Caltex Oil, the managing director of Pakistan State Oil, chairman of Shell Pakistan, chief executive of Total Parco Pakistan, the MD of National Refinery, the MD of Pak Arab Refinery and the chief executive of Pakistan Refinery are respondents in the petition.
It asked the court to direct the petroleum ministry to reduce the petroleum prices as per resolutions passed by the provincial assemblies of the NWFP and Balochistan. The petitioner said that under the constitution the federal government was bound to respect the resolutions by placing a bill in parliament.
He asked the court to declare that the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority Ordinance 2002 would prevail over all other laws, including the Petroleum Products (Petroleum Development Levy) Ordinance, 1961, while the OCAC should be restrained from regulating prices of petroleum products.
The court should also hold that powers of the executive authority could not be delegated to a private person or body like the OCAC, the petition said.
It contended that the respondents had no right to impose general sales tax or any other taxes on the increased prices of petroleum products except in the annual budget or by an act of parliament.
|
|
|
|
