Find a Lawyer

IESCO, ISLAMABAD versus ADVISORY COMMITTEE GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE

Article 24 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Application Laches consumers challenged their electricity bill before the Electricity Inspector who forwarded the matter to the Advisory Committee and the matter was decided in favor of the consumers. The supply company (applicant) had ordered that the order on the ground that the Advisory Committee had no jurisdiction as the matter was related to theft. The validity petitioner had not raised objections to the advisory committee during the proceedings, though he remained in touch with the proceedings when the applicant company faced laches because it was filed seven months later. Was. Electricity inspector's order was not placed on file and electric inspector was not set up as party to the constitutional request, approval of the Advisory Committee's defamation order was delayed and the constitutional request was dismissed.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012

• BASHIR AHMED v. SKYLINE LAHORE (PVT.) COMPANY through Chief Executive 2012 CLD 1627
• AHSAN SULEMAN v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE 2012 MLD 1631
• Mst. ASHRAF BIBI v. MUHAMMAD AMIN 2012 CLC 1634
• ABDUL WAHAB v. State 2012 YLR 1636
• Mst. MUGHLANI BIBI v. MUHAMMAD MANSHA 2012 CLC 1651
• Mrs. QAMAR KHALID RASOOL v. FAYSAL BANK LIMITED 2012 CLD 1654
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ v. THE STATE 2012 PCrLJ 1655
• Mst. SIDDIQUA BIBI v. Mst. IRSHAD BATOOL 2012 MLD 1659

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2012 →

top advocate from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes