Civil Appeal Nos.977 & 978 of 2018 and C.M.A. No.3658/2019 in C.A. No.978/2018 6 period of time across a limited area. Clearly then, both sections operate in separate spheres and situations with no conflict between them nor any primacy being given to one over the other. 6. As far as the policy directive dated 26.12.2009 is concerned, it has been issued by the Federal Government in exercise of its power under Section 8(2)(c) of the Act. Consequently, the said directive is a piece of delegated legislation. The purpose of such an executive instrument has been set out by this Court in Muhammad Amin Muhammad Bashir Limited Vs. Government of Pakistan (2015 SCMR 630) at para-7: Para 7:… “[delegated legislation is] intended to enforce the law, not override it. [It] can fill in details but not vary the underlying statutory principles.” The policy directive dated 26.12.2009 sets out the purpose, causes and parameters of suspensory action by PTA. It gives law enforcement authorities the power to forward written requests to PTA specifying the cellular services to be closed, the time and duration of closure and the specific area where such closure is to be implemented in case of significant threat of “hostilities against Pakistan by a foreign power” or “internal aggression by terrorists/groups.” It is obvious that these events are significant for public safety and national security. However, their limited and transient Emergency occurrence under cannot the justify Constitution the imposition which can of an continue uninterrupted for 60 days without sanction of the two Houses [Article 232(7) of the Constitution]. Therefore, there is nothing in the policy directive dated 26.12.2009 which contravenes any substantive provision of Section 54 of the Act. Instead, it complements and strengthens the purpose of the Act by attending