June 06, 2008	Friday	Jamadi-us-Sani 01, 1429

KARACHI, June 5: The Sindh High Court allowed the Competition Commission of Pakistan to proceed with its inquiry into a complaint lodged by the Islamabad and Lahore bourses against the Karachi Stock Exchange but restrained it from announcing its final decision in the matter till the next date of hearing of a KSE petition to be fixed by office after the summer vacation.

The KSC was asked to file its legal and factual objections and arguments before the commission within three weeks and the latter was directed to take a decision on the preliminary objections within the next three weeks. The bench also allowed the Lahore Stock Exchange to join in the proceedings as a co-respondent. The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan was directed to file in the court the comments submitted by it before the Competition Commission.

The Lahore Stock Exchange, which has about 400 companies listed on it, and the Islamabad Stock Exchange, with about 200 listed companies, have interlinked their trading to enable members of one exchange to trade freely in the other exchange. They demanded of the KSE, which has about 562 companies listed on it, to provide the same facility to the members of the LSE and ISE on a reciprocal basis. The KSE, however, refused to join in the linkage and advised the members of the two bourses to become its members in order to enjoy its trading facility.

The two up-country exchanges lodged a complaint with the Competition Commission of Pakistan under Section 3 of the Pakistan Competition Commission Ordinance, 2007, alleging that the KSE was abusing its dominant position by refusing the linkage. The commission issued the KSE a show-cause notice to initiate an inquiry and the exchange challenged the notice in the SHC through Advocate Munib Akhtar. A division bench comprising Justices Mrs Qaiser Iqbal and Syed Mahmood Alam Rizvi stayed the operation of the notice on May 2 and issued notices to the respondent commission.

The commission, meanwhile, approached the court through Advocates Abdul Sattar Pirzada, Usman Hadi and Rana Ikramullah for vacation of the stay order as it was preventing the commission from performing its statutory function. The commission’s plea came up before a vacation division bench consisting of Justices Munib Ahmed Khan and Syed Pir Ali Shah.

The bench modified the stay order to allow the commission to proceed but barred it from taking a final decision on the LSE and ISE complaint till the next date of hearing after the summer vacation.

The LSE, which was allowed to be impleaded as a respondent on Thursday, was represented by Advocate Salman Akram Raja. The ISE has yet to become a party as the KSE petition cited only the Competition Commission and the Federation as respondents.

The direction to the SECP was issued when Advocate Munib Akhtar argued that the matter fell within its purview and not in that of the Competition Commission. Advocate A.S. Pirzada rejoined that the SECP has already filed its comments before the Competition Commission and has thus accepted the latter’s jurisdiction in the matter.

Students’ plea

Justice Arshad Noor Khan of the Sindh High Court has asked the directors of the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi and Sukkur to appear on June 9 along with certificates of eight students who passed out from IBA, Sukkur in 2007.

Amjad Latif Memon and seven other students submitted through Advocate Nasir Maqsood that they secured admissions to the IBA, Sukkur for MSc in computer science in response to advertisements claiming that the institute was affiliated with the IBA, Karachi which was the degree-awarding institution. The prospectus made the same claim without any qualification. They paid heavy fees and studied for their postgraduate degree at Sukkur. At the end of the two-year programme, they were declared ‘pass’ in the marks transcripts for the final year.

The IBA, Karachi, however, declined to issue degrees as the IBA, Sukkur ‘was not affiliated with it for postgraduate degrees’. Their representations to the two institutes failed to elicit a positive response and they filed a suit for award of degrees and damages in the Sindh High Court.

The plaintiffs said they had been denied their degrees even after a year of passing their MSc examination. Meanwhile, the two IBAs formally de-linked and became independent of each other. The IBA, Sukkur could now award degrees on its own. But the institute’s counsel informed the court on May 12 that the degrees were lying with the Printing Press of Pakistan. The same plea was taken on the next date on May 31 and the court asked the directors to appear on June 9 along with the academic record and certificates of the plaintiff students.

Bail granted

A division bench comprising Justices Rana Mohammad Shamim and Ghulam Dastgir A. Shahani admitted Sikandar Zaman Jukhio, former manager of the Malir branch of the Allied Bank Limited, to bail in the sum of Rs1 million. The ex-manager is facing trial for opening a fake account at the ABL’s Malir branch, while he was its manager.

He transferred a customer’s deposit to the fake account and withdrew Rs600,000 from it. The customer, Haji Irshad Memon, lodged a complaint with the Federal Investigation Agency, which registered a case and commenced prosecution. The special court for banking offences, which is trying the case, declined to grant him bail and he approached the high court through Advocate Naeem Iqbal.

Hearing adjourned

The hearing of a petition moved by Istiqlal Mehdi, managing director of the Pak-Kuwait Investment Company, against his removal from service was adjourned till June 18. The petitioner has obtained a stay against his removal and the appointment of his successor, Shamsuzzaman.

A law officer sought an early date as the investment company was suffering loss of funds because of litigation over its top office.

Judge’s plea

The division bench comprising Justices Munib Ahmed Khan and Syed Pir Ali Shah also adjourned the hearing of retired Justice Ms Majida Rizvi’s petition for retirement benefits.

According to her, she was a few months’ short of the five-year service, which qualified a high court judge for pensionary benefits. The petitioner through Advocate Mushtaq A. Memon said that the few months’ shortfall in her service might be condoned and she be awarded the retirement benefits.