ICC TEXTILES LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE versus WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (WAPDA), WAPDA HOUSE, LAHORE THROUGH CHAIRMAN
Section 31 (2) (b) subsets the short order of the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority Tariff Standards and Procedure Rules, 1998 tariff, and consequently the detailed commitment issued by the authority, in the present case, the short order had passed, was not envisaged by the Regulation of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power, Act, 1997, therefore, it was illegal, illegal and could be issued without any jurisdiction. The detailed order appears that matters of instability are clearly considered. However, it was unclear whether they were compiled, no evidence was recorded, and in their absence the reasons for the formation of cases and the reasons for not recording the evidence were clear that a substantial portion of the distribution margin was The A&M was costly but basically the same as it was allowed on the basis of previous years \ No records were available on the expenditure record whether any expenditures were carefully or not allowed to offend D-Line losses. Went and did not consider the rate of return on investment of fraudulent and comparable risks without any rationale and reasoning Came and was not kept in view, although some licensing claims were not allowed, but this fact cannot be avoided. The determination / order was approved without reference or the requirement or procedure was not complied with for the purpose of the whole exercise and the standards and guidelines required to be maintained under the law were ignored. It seems that the authority does not have such requirements
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
