Find a Lawyer

WAQAR AHMED versus WAPDA

Sections 23, 24 8c The applicant's ice factory was charged with tariff B1 tariff B1 and tariff B distribution tariff B1 and was charged under tariff B1 and was regularly charged for his bills. Were paying. Seasonal allegations under tariff officials refused to correct the bill despite numerous requests, petitioner filed a lawsuit which was rejected by the courts under Tariff B1 and F, respectively, fueling consumers under Tariff B1. Overcharges were incurred and consumers were made to pay minimal charges even if no electricity was used. Traffic F provided the seasonal load to be disconnected at the end of the season and if the user does not request for reconnection, the supplier's equipment will be terminated. There is no presumption of payment. The burden of low charges was present, the applicant's case was never disconnected and when there was no electricity, the minimum charges were being levied on it. y Despite the fact that a seasonal connection was filed, it was clear that a permanent connection was given and under this condition the tariff was being received from the applicant in such circumstances tariff would be beneficial for the consumers. Because in the same way, he will lose the minimum payment. The evidence on record was extensively misunderstood by the courts below when the allegations of electricity remained unconnected, their decisions and orders were upheld by the High Court for its use of jurisdiction. Were kept under control and in fact power of attorney advocate Nawab Shah lawyer