LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has dismissed a challenge to the proposed winding up of the utility stores in the country, observing the parliament is the appropriate forum for debates on questions involving political economy.

`The courts cannot interfere with the policy either on the ground that it is errone-ous or that a better, fairer or wiser alternative is available,` Justice Raheel Kamran ruled in a verdict issued on Wednesday.

The judge observed that the duty of the court is to confine itself to the question of legality and its concern should be whether a decision making authority exceeded its powers or committed an error of law.

He said the policies of the government may not remain stagnant, rather with the change in economic climate, the wisdom and the manner for the government to run commercial projects may require reconsideration.

`A policy might have been in the public interest at one point of time, however, the same cannot be considered so at some other point of time,` Justice Kamran remarked.

He held that any decision of the govern-ment that it cannot run a corporation or any other form is not justiciable.

The judge noted that the scope of judicial review of the government`s policy is now well-settled.

He observed, `The courts cannot assume the role of appellate authority to examine the rightness, suitability and appositeness of a policy.

The judge also noted that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case that the decision of the government to wind up the Utility Store Corporation (USC) was illegal or opposed to the Constitution.

The judge observed that the government`s decision may have an impact on the employees` rights in future upon implementation of the policy decision, who may avail the remedies in accordance with law for vio-lation of their legal rights, if any, before the concerned forum.

Since no adverse action has so far been taken against the employees of the USC, no writ can be issued against the government to prevent its policy decision, the judge added in the judgement.

`It is well-settled that a writ lies when some legal right of any party is infringed which clearly is not the case here,` he explained.

Petitioner Muzamil Rafiq pleaded that the USC being a state owned entity had its own vigilance system to snub any sort of pilferage or malpractice and is self-sustaining organization.

He said the corporation had never taken a single penny from the government to run its business including disbursement of salaries to staff rather it generates revenue for thegovernment so no question for winding up this profitable entity arises. He maintained that subsidies allowed by the government was passed on to the general public by the USC in a systematic and transparent manner.

He contended that as many as 12000 employees had been working in the USC, half of which were either on daily wages or contract basis who cannot be absorbed in any other department/organization.A law officer on behalf of the federation argued that no adverse order had been passed against the employees of the USC, therefore, the petition was premature. He further contended that the decision of the government to wind up the USC was a policy matter which cannot be assailed before the courts.

Justice Kamran dismissed the petition for being devoid of any merit.