LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday withdrew a stay order against the food department’s notification of the commencement of crushing season 2020-21 for the sugar mills in Punjab.

As per the notification the mills situated in southern part of Punjab are required to commence crushing on Nov 10 and mills in rest of the province on Nov 15.

Several mills filed petitions challenging the notification and on previous hearing the court had issued a stay order. Subsequently, the provincial government filed an application opposing the stay order.

Additional Advocate General Akhtar Yaqoob argued before the court that the government had been facing problems to control the prices of sugar due to the suspension of the crushing season. He further said that payments to the farmers had also been delayed by the sugar mills after the stay issued by the court. He asked the court to withdraw the stay order.

Justice Ayesha A. Malik allowed the government’s application and recalled the stay. The judge would resume hearing on the petitions next week.

The mills’ through their counsel had pleaded that the schedule announced by the government would badly affect the production of sugar. They said the law restricted the government from starting the crushing season every year before the last week of November.

They said the early start of crushing season would result in less production of sugar.

PETITION: The appointment of Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan as a special assistant on information to Punjab chief minister has been challenged in the Lahore High Court.

Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, a lawyer of the Supreme Court, filed the petition pleading that the appointment of Dr Awan in the provincial cabinet was a violation of a Supreme Court’s verdict in Justice Qazi Faez Isa case.

The lawyer states that the apex court in its verdict remarked that Dr Awan used contemptuous language against a sitting judge, and her appointment as CM’s assistant may be considered as dismissive of the ruling.

He argues that the respondent should be made answerable for her conduct under Article 204(2)(b) of the Constitution through independent proceedings. He also asked the court to set aside the appointment of the respondent for being unconstitutional.

Published in Dawn, November 11th, 2020