Petitioner says Dec 23 move is in violation of law governing the airline
He states that the federal government, while issuing the EOI, did not appreciate the legal fact that PIA is a trans-provincial institution included in the Federal Legislative List, Part II, hence without the approval of the Council of Common Interests (CCI) as mandated under Article 154 of the Constitution, since no privatisation could take place.
He argues that the government, through its cabinet committee, passed an order illegally for the privatisation of PIA without the approval of CCI and Parliament.
He contends that any restructuring or transfer of assets should remain within government-controlled entities as per the sections 3 and 4 of the 2016 Act.
The petitioner claims that massive public funds have been injected into the airline over decades and its sale to a private group is a matter of significant public interest.
He contends that the respondents, to justify privatisation, falsely portrayed PIA as a burden on the public exchequer and wrongly stated that its value is five times less than its accumulated losses (approximately Rs800bn).
In fact, he claims, PIA has not been receiving grants or subsidies from the government as its financial difficulties are due to debt servicing, mismanagement and policy failures.
He argues that the process for the sale of the asset adopted by the respondents amounts to misuse of authority, lack of transparency and arbitrary.
The lawyer argues that an amendment made to Section 28 of the Privatisation Commission Ordinance on Dec 14 2023, to oust jurisdiction of high courts, does not apply to the case in hand, since the petition challenges constitutional and legal violations, not private disputes between bidders.
He asserts that the sale of a national asset like PIA falls under judicial scrutiny under Article 199 of the Constitution.
Advocate Kahloon, who is known for representing aviation industry’s employees before courts, alleges that he has been subjected to harassment for raising the issue of the PIA’s privatisation.
The lawyer asks the court to declare the sale null and void, specifically the agreement reached on Dec 23, 2025.
He also urges the court to suspend all further steps, halt any actions arising from the May 2025 EOI and order that any necessary restructuring be kept strictly within state-owned entities.
