PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Friday stopped the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government from going ahead with its plan to take the possession and control of the Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation assets and employees in the province for the time being.

During the hearing into a Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation petition against the September 1 government notification of the said plan, a bench comprising Justice Qaisar Rasheed Khan and Justice Asadullah Khan Chamkani directed the provincial government to maintain status quo on the matter.

It also sought comments of the provincial tourism secretary and the Tourism Corporation Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on the petition by the next hearing on Sept 16.

The notification stated: “The Secretary Sports, Tourism, Archaeology, Museums and Youth Affairs Department Mohammad Azam Khan with the approval of Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, assumed the administrative control, management of assets and employees of Pakistan Tourism Development Corporation located in the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through the Managing Director of the Tourism Corporation Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for management of the affairs.”

Asks KP govt to file response to PTDC petition by 16th

The legal battle between the PTDC and the TCKP over the notification has intensified.

First, the TCKP filed a writ petition challenging a PTDC advertisement about the auction of some of its properties which the TCKP claimed was devolved to the province in the light of the Eighteenth (Constitution Amendment) Act 2010.

In the meantime, the provincial government issued the impugned notification on Sept 1 in which the administration and police in different areas were informed that the TCKP would take possession of the properties in question, including 19 hotels and motels.

The PTDC, in its petition, has requested the court to declare that the impugned notification was based on mala fide.

It also prayed that in terms of Article 270AA of the Constitution unless proper legislation draft was tabled, amended, altered or otherwise in the provincial assemblies, the previous laws concerned should remain in force.

Raja Samiul Haq Satti, lawyer for the PTDC, told the bench on Friday that his client had no objection to the handing over of the said tourism assets to the province in light of the passage of the 18th constitutional amendment.

He, however, said the province had to adopt certain mechanism for the purpose.

The lawyer said the provincial officials had been creating problems in the said properties by using police and district administrations, which amounted to harassing the relevant staff.

He said the PTDC was a legal entity owning and possessing assets to the tune of billions of rupees and was incorporated under the Companies Ordinance, 1984.

The lawyer said after the 18th amendment was passed, the Ministry of Inter-Provincial Coordination (IPC) was formed to govern the same transitionally but later, it was decided that the PTDC would be governed by the Cabinet Division until the time it was devolved to the provinces completely.

He said realising the responsibility and keeping in view the legal preposition, the PTDC Board of Directors decided to proceed with the winding up of its PTD Corporations and its subsidiaries under Companies Ordinance, 1984 and that the 76th meeting of the BoDs took place on April 4, 2013 for the purpose.

The lawyer said the winding up of the PTDC and its subsidiaries could not take place unless liquidator was appointed and assets were transferred to the provincial governments; commercial viability of Motels/restaurant or other assets of PTDC had to be ascertained; and the service structure, benefits and emoluments of the present employees of the PTDC and its subsidiaries were settled fairly and strictly in accordance with the law.

He said on Oct 23, 2013, the BoD held 78th meeting wherein it was decided that evaluation of the assets on market rates be carried out.

The lawyer said the provincial secretary of tourism had travelled beyond his power with ulterior motives illegally and against the law and issued the impugned notification.

He said in the Companies Ordinance, complete procedure of liquidation proceedings had been described and that the Government’s owned Corporation could not be dissolved without deciding the liability and assets and that other ancillary issues had not been determined according to the law.