Affecting goodwill: Cement factory challenges SC’s Nov 19 order
Top court had directed company to pay Rs20 million in Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand Dams Fund as penalty
Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: AFP
ISLAMABAD:
The Dera Ghazi Khan Cement, owned by the Mansha Group, has approached the apex court, seeking review of its earlier order about imposition of a penalty on account of the factory administration’s conduct.
The two-judge Supreme Court bench – headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar – while disposing of the matter on November 19 ordered the company to pay Rs20 million in the Supreme Court Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand Dams Fund as penalty.
Even though the factory has deposited Rs100 million in the dams fund but the management through its lawyer Salman Aslam Butt has filed a review petition which says the court's observation about imposition of a penalty may be detrimental for repute of the company as a corporate entity.
The petitioner has also expressed regret over any inadvertent action on its part or of its administration. “The petitioner is a law abiding corporate entity which always endeavoured to comply with the court's order,” it says.
It also raises question over conduct of an applicant Raja Waseem. It contends that there was no order to restrain the petitioner from filling ponds through tube wells, which were shut down later.
The Dera Ghazi Khan Cement, owned by the Mansha Group, has approached the apex court, seeking review of its earlier order about imposition of a penalty on account of the factory administration’s conduct.
The two-judge Supreme Court bench – headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar – while disposing of the matter on November 19 ordered the company to pay Rs20 million in the Supreme Court Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand Dams Fund as penalty.
Even though the factory has deposited Rs100 million in the dams fund but the management through its lawyer Salman Aslam Butt has filed a review petition which says the court's observation about imposition of a penalty may be detrimental for repute of the company as a corporate entity.
The petitioner has also expressed regret over any inadvertent action on its part or of its administration. “The petitioner is a law abiding corporate entity which always endeavoured to comply with the court's order,” it says.
It also raises question over conduct of an applicant Raja Waseem. It contends that there was no order to restrain the petitioner from filling ponds through tube wells, which were shut down later.