Supply of free flour for underprivileged cannot be questioned, says Lahore High Court

Lahore High Court has ruled that the government is responsible for providing free flour to those living below the poverty line and unable to purchase it themselves, and therefore the supply of free flour cannot be challenged in court. The court also stated that the supply of free flour under the government’s “Ramzan package” is a policy decision that cannot be interfered with by the court. This ruling came in response to a petition filed by a bar member challenging the government’s fixation of the wheat price at Rs3,900 per 40 kg.

LHC dismissed the petition, stating that the government has the authority to fix prices and take necessary measures to cater to the needs of the people. The court also observed that the fixation of prices of commodities such as wheat by the government falls within the policy-making domain of the government and that this function must be performed keeping in mind various factors such as the availability of stocks and demand and supply.

The court further noted that the government’s power to fix prices cannot be ordinarily interfered with by the court in its constitutional jurisdiction and that in the absence of any law or policy, the court cannot issue directions to respondents to provide flour or wheat to consumers at subsidised rates. The court also stated that the government’s purchase and sale of wheat, provision of wheat to flour mills, subsidised value, and framing of policy to provide flour at a particular rate or free of cost to deserving people of the society are all within the policy-making domain of the government.

The court held that the government’s fixation of the wheat price was within its jurisdiction and powers, and that the government’s decision to fix the price was made after considering various factors, including regulating market forces. According to Brecorder, the court observed that the government’s power to fix prices cannot be challenged by petitioners who do not have access to the relevant data or the capability to determine various aspects of the price-fixing criteria.

In conclusion, the court ruled that the government has the authority to fix the price of wheat and that the supply of free flour to those in need is a policy decision that cannot be challenged in court. The court also noted that the fixation of prices of commodities falls within the policy-making domain of the government and must be performed in consideration of various factors and that the court cannot interfere with the government’s power to fix prices in its constitutional jurisdiction.