HABIBULLAH ENERGY LIMITED versus WAPDA THROUGH CHAIRMAN
Article 199 The High Court contracted to lease a Constitutional Public Procurement Transparency Award for a public property before a lease of a power plant (public asset) by WAPDA to the respondent. Dismissed, the appellants point out, that no specific advertisement bid was issued on the lease of the said power plant, and in the absence of such advertisement, the entire process was bound to be set aside. , The appellants further claimed that those involved in the decision-making process had easy and exclusive access. And the respondents' offer to get a power plant lease was unwarranted. And it got leased through illegal methods The test of the validity of the transaction in question revealed that the actual process started through an advertisement was for the appointment of a plant operator. And such a process was formally terminated, and then a free agreement was initiated by WAPDA, resulting in a contentious agreement for the lease, which was not linked to the \ operator's appointment process. The public advertisement was not released nor was such a release. An advertisement was universally accepted as a prerequisite for ensuring the transfer of rights to public assets or rights in a free, fair, open, competitive and transparent process, such an ad was issued by WAPDA. No compelling reason was requested for no, and absence. The same was fatal to the transaction in question, giving respondents the unilateral benefit of unilateral access to the power plant.
