LHC disposes of all petitions against fixing sugar prices

The court does not interfere in the technical issue of sugar pricing, says the verdict


Our Correspondent October 02, 2021

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Saturday disposed of all petitions against the fixing of sugar prices in the country.

During the hearing of the petitions, Deputy Attorney General Asad Bajwa appeared on behalf of the federal government.

The court issued a 14-page written verdict on the petitions filed by sugar mill owners – including by estranged PTI member Jahangir Tareen – which stated that the matter was already pending in the appellate committee.

“The court does not interfere in the technical issue of sugar pricing,” the verdict remarked.

According to the decision, there was a competent forum to hear the appeals of sugar mills and their owners and the appellate committee should also keep the consumers in mind while fixing the price and also remove reservations of the mill owners.

Read More: Govt efforts to bring down sugar prices bite the dust

On September 27, it was reported that the federal government has imported the ‘most expensive’ sugar in the history of the country for Utility Stores.

A consignment of 28,760 metric tons of sugar was imported by the Trading Corporation of Pakistan (TCP). The TCP paid Rs109.90 per kg for the imported sugar at the port. In comparison, last year the land cost of 100,000 tons of sugar was Rs89.26 per kg.

Adding all the expenses, the Utility Stores would receive sugar at around Rs123 per kg.

The government has fixed the ex-mill rate of sugar produced in the country at Rs84.75 per kg.
Therefore, the imported sugar would be Rs25.15 per kg more expensive than the official ex-mill rate.

According to the government’s decision, the imported sugar would be sold at Rs85 per kg at Utility Stores and the difference between the purchase price and sale would be met through subsidy.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read