Find a Lawyer

MULTAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY LTD. THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE versus MUHAMMAD ASHIQ

Section 26 (6), 26 A&36 (3) Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act (XL of 1997), Section 38 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application to detect the High Court Objection to the advisory board's jurisdiction to declare such illegal constitutional petition by the licensors, due to theft of the bill or summary of the energy, the High Court did not do so before the board of observation. But dismissing such objections stated that there was jurisdiction based on the direction given by the Advisory Board. Provincial jurisdiction under section 36 (3) of the Electricity Act, 1910, as a matter of law, unless specifically granted, the jurisdiction to decide the validity of the detection bill. Nor can its guidance be followed. Establishment of Advisory Board Offices under Rule 38 of Generation, Delivery and Distribution The Electric Power Act, 1997 cannot be authorized to enforce the decision on theft cases and decide on theft cases. Neither the Advisory Board had the original or appeal jurisdiction to ratify the disputed bill of inquiry; the electric inspector did not have the authority to decide on such a dispute; instead, only the civil court could resolve such acts. Have no jurisdiction in the case of those who were not against the licensing authority to withhold relief. Had licensed constitutional jurisdiction in governmental capacity and had no personal benefit. Unfair result Supreme Court accepts appeal immigration advocates email from Fizagat lawyer