Find a Lawyer

MEPCO versus ADVISORY BOARD, PUNJAB, LAHORE

26 Sections 26 (6) and 26A - Detection Bill - Electric Inspector, Power Distribution Company's decision, was upset over the decision of the Electric Inspector and Provincial Advisory Board against the consumer-demanded tracking bill - Accuracy - Provision of Section 26A The Electricity Act, 1910, only talked about dishonest summary and the use of electricity, levying / applying money to the user through licensors. In any case, the amount payable due to the audit object may start from dishonest summary, by no means fall within the scope of the electric inspector - HC Kept the constitutional jurisdiction apart from the practical underpinnings. Orders / decisions by the Electric Inspector and Provincial Advisory Board were allowed constitutional application, [pp 773, 774] B&C

PLD 2017 Lahore 769

Before Mudassir Khalid Abbasi, J

MEPCO and others—Petitioners

versus

ADVISORY BOARD, PUNJAB, LAHORE and others—Respondents

Writ Petition No.3439 of 2009, heard on 31st January, 2017.

(a) Electricity Act (IX of 1910)—

—S. 26(6)—Electric Inspector—Jurisdiction—Electric Inspector can

only determine disputes relating to defective meter or otherwise [p. 773] A

Water and Power Development Authority and others v. Messrs Kamal Food (Pvt.) Ltd. Okara and others PLD 2012 SC 371 rel.

(b) Electricity Act (IX of 1910)—

—Ss. 26(6) & 26-A—Detection bill—Electric Inspector, decision of— Electricity Distribution Company, was aggrieved of decisions made by Electric Inspector and Provincial Advisory Board against detection bill demanded from the consumer—Validity—Provision of S.26-A of Electricity Act, 1910, only spoke of charging/imposing of amount by licensee upon consumer, regarding dishonest abstraction and consumption of electricity; which might not be through tampering in metering equipment, in any case amount payable on account of audit objection, could be originating from dishonest abstraction did not, in any manner fall within the purview of Electric Inspector—High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction set aside the orders/decisions by Electric Inspector and Provincial Advisory Board Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances, [pp. 773, 774] B & C

Water and Power Development Authority and others v. Mian Muhammad Riaz and another PLD 1995 Lah. 56 rel.

Authority and others v. Umaid Khan PLD 1987 Pesh. 48 ref.

Mehr. Irshad Ahmad Arain for Petitioners.

Muhammad Aurangzeb Khan, Assistant Advocate-General along with Muhammad Khurram Zahoor, Asstt. Electric Inspector for Respondents Nos.l and 2.

Date of hearing: 31st January, 2017.

best advocate from Kalaswala lawyer