FLYING BOARD AND PAPER PRODUCTS LTD. versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY CABINET DIVISION
Sections 46 and 47 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), the applicant companies determining the electricity rates, received the tax before the High Court on the basis that the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) collected the revenue from the High Court. There are rules for determining. Using constitutional jurisdiction, the plea remanded the matter to Napra for a fresh commitment to the guidelines and observations given in the decision taken by the applicant companies, noting that their challenge was not only distribution. The margin was the same but the entire tariff did not look right as it went forward. Before taking NAPRA in various stages, one in respect of Generation Companies (GENCOs), the other in relation to National Transmission and Dispatch Company (NTDC) and the third for the Distribution Companies (DISCOs) and the third for the final phase of the commitment. I participated. The tariff requirement for discus justification, even by the conduct of the applicant companies, spoke out against them that they did not make the former, namely GENCOs and NTDCs, in which case the parties that were the necessary parties In the two-step process regarding the GENCOs and the NTDC, it would have challenged the determination of tariffs if they had done so in their constitutional application (before the party's decision) or before the Supreme Court's decision, which was passed by the High Court. So, the applicants wanted to raise such an objection in front of Nipra freely if they were asked to do so at this stage. No challenge will consider bills and their object is available and can handle it. Issued by the Federal Government in connection with the taxation in accordance with the law / rules
