IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

W.P. No._____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal S/o Shan Muhammad, caste Sukhera, R/o Mauza

Wahi Waryam, Chak No. 100/M, Tehsil & District Lodhran.
Petitioner
VERSUS

1. Multan Electric Supply Company Ltd. Khanewal Road, Multan,

through its Chief Executive at Multan.

2. Executive Engineer, MEPCO Ltd. Lodhran Division Lodhran.

3. S.D.O. MEPCO Ltd. Lodhran Sub-Division, Lodhran.

4. Electric Inspector, Multan Region, Multan.

Respondents

Writ Petition under Article 199 of

the Constitution of Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

Respectfully Sheweth: -
1. That the names and addresses of the parties have correctly been
given for the purpose of their summons and citations.

2. That the petitioner and his brothers leased out their agricultural
land to Mian Ashiq son of Yar Muhammad who obtained
electric connection in his name from
 WAPDA (now MEPCO) in 19 , under A/c No. 5311-2690900/F,
to operate tube-well for irrigation. On the expiry of lease
agreement in 1988, the lessee, Mian Ashiq Khan handed over the
possession of land along-with tube-well to the petitioner and his
brothers. Since then, the tube-well is under control and custody
of petitioner. However, the electricity bills were being paid
regularly and nothing was outstanding against this connection
uptill 4/2001 (copy of last bill paid in 4/2001 is Annex “A”).

3. That agony to the petitioner started when an employee of

MEPCO Sub-Division Lodhran named Shafi Ullah Line man,
who is notorious to be a tout of respondent No. 3 contacted the
petitioner and demanded Rs. 5,000/- as illegal gratification for
respondent No. 3 and also enticed the petitioner to join hands
with him and gain a lot through stealing of energy. This unlawful
demand was refused. Mr. Shafi Ullah line man became furious
and after exchange of some hot words, he left away threatening
the petitioner for dire consequences.

4. That just after two days of the occurrence, a detection bill

amounting to Rs. 45,388/- (prepared manually under the
signatures of respondent No. 3) was served upon the petitioner on
12.4.2001, with grace date for payment as 13.4.2001, on account
of alleged 69% slowness of meter. In fact, the meter was
functioning correctly duly secured in A.T.B. installed outside the
premises by respondents according to their own design (copy of
detection bill is Annex “B”).

5. That on failure to get any remedy from respondents No. 2 & 3,

the petitioner served them with a notice on 19.4.2001, intimating
that he intends to seek remedy from appropriate legal forum
under law for the determination of accuracy of meter but no
response was given for a considerable long period by the
respondents. Copy of notice and better copy is Annex “C & C/1”.
6. That the petitioner filed an application before the Electric
Inspector, Multan Region, Multan on 13.6.2001, which was
accepted and stay order No. EIM/RAB/4376-79 dated 13.6.2001
was issued. (Copies of application and stay order are Annexes “D
& E”).

7. That the stay order was delivered to the respondents No. 2 & 3 on
the same day i.e. 13.6.2001. On receipt of stay order, the
respondent No. 3 became furiated and said, “I do not care for the
stay order issued by Electric Inspector. I will disconnect the
supply, which will not be restored untill the detection bill is paid
even if you go to the High Court. Do whatever you can.” Then he
called for his staff and ordered to disconnect the supply and
remove the Transformer etc. The orders were implemented,
supply was disconnected on 13.6.2001 before sunset and
metering equipment etc. were removed on 15.6.2001 early in the
morning.

8. That the deliberate disregard of the valid orders of competent

authority by respondent No. 3 was brought into the notice of
learned Electric Inspector, Multan on 23.6.2001, through written
application with request to initiate contempt proceedings against
the respondent No. 3. Again, a notice No. 4712 dated 30.6.2001
was issued to respondent No. 3 to appear before the learned
forum on 6.7.2001, but none from MEPCO appeared on the
specified date. (Copy of notice is Annex “F”).

9. That on 6.7.2001, the petitioner informed the learned Forum that

he is under hot waters as respondents have lodged F.I.R. No.
87/2001 dated 29.6.2001 with police station Qureshi Wala,
against the petitioner and others. The allegation of theft of energy
is absolutely false as the supply had already been disconnected
from 11 K.V main line on 13.6.2001 and transformer was
removed on 15.6.2001. The theft of electricity was
practically/physically impossible. It was just an attempt to cover
the act of illegal disconnection of supply and without serving any
 prior notice under the laws. It is pertinent to point out that no
case property was taken into custody by police. (Copy of F.I.R. is
Annex “G”).

10.That according to learned Electric Inspector Multan (respondent

No. 4), he could not get his orders implemented due to lack of
powers. The case has been closed senidie on 6.7.2001 with the
advice that petitioner is at liberty to approach Hon’ble High
Court. Copy of proceedings dated 6.7.2001 is Annex “H”.

11.That the arbitrary and illegal acts of respondent No. 3 to

disconnect the electric supply in total disregard of valid orders of
legal forum has brought disaster to the petitioner. The crops of
KHARIF were ruined for want of water. The RABI crops could
not be sowed as land could not be cultivated which will further
result in irreparable financial loss and damage to socio-economic
status of the petitioner. On the other hand, closing of case senidie
by the learned Electric Inspector, Multan (respondent No. 4) is to
stifle the justice.

12.That in view of above, there is no other alternate, efficacious and

speedy remedy available to the petitioner except to invoke the
constitutional jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER: -

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that: -

a) This petition be graced with acceptance and

disconnection of supply on 13.6.2001, without
prior notice, even in presence of valid restraining
orders issued by competent forum established
under law, may graciously be declared as illegal,
without justification and without any lawful
authority and the respondents No. 2 & 3 may
kindly be directed to restore the supply
immediately at their own expenses.
 b) The respondent No. 4 may kindly be directed to
restore the proceedings in accordance with law
and adjudicate the matter for the ends of justice.

c) Any other writ, order, direction or relief

expedient in the interest of justice may also be
issued, if deemed necessary by this Hon’ble
Court.

HUMBLE PETITIONER,

Dated: .12.2001

Through: -
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts,
Multan.

CERTIFICATE: -
It is certified that as per instructions of the
client no such petition has earlier been filed
before this Hon’ble Court.
Advocate

BOOKS: -
1. The Electricity Act, 1910.
2. The R.G.T.D. of the Electric Power Act, 1997.
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

W.P. No. ______________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Afzal S/o Shan Muhammad, caste
Sukhera, R/o Mauza Wahi Waryam, Chak No. 100/M,
Tehsil & District Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned petition are true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief and
nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
 of December 2001 that the contents of this
affidavit are true & correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

APPLICATION FOR DISPENSING WITH THE

FILING OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF ANNEXURES.
=========================================

Respectfully Sheweth:-
That certified copies of Annexures “A, B & G” are not
available. However, uncertified/photo state copies of the
same have been annexed with the petition, which are true
copies of original documents.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

court may please dispense with the filing of aforesaid copies
of documents.
APPLICANT

Dated: __________
 Through: -
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts,
Multan.

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

DISPENSATION APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Afzal S/o Shan Muhammad, caste
Sukhera, R/o Mauza Wahi Waryam, Chak No. 100/M,
Tehsil & District Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
 of December 2001 that the contents of this
affidavit are true & correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

W.P. No.____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

INDEX

S. No. DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS ANNEXES PAGES

1 Urgent Form
2 Stamp Paper worth Rs. 500/-
3 Writ Petition.
4 Affidavit
5 Copy of bill of 4/2001. A
6 Copy of detection bill. B
7 Copy of notice & better copy. C & C/1
8 Copies of application & stay order. D&E
9 Copy of notice. F
10 Copy of F.I.R. G
11 Copy of proceedings dated 6.7.2001. H
12 Dispensation Application.
13 Affidavit.
14 Application U/s 151 C.P.C.
15 Affidavit.
16 Vakalatnama.

PETITIONER
Dated: _________
Through: -
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts,
Multan.
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

Application U/s-151 C.P.C.

for the restoration of electric supply.

The applicant respectfully sheweth as under: -

1. That the above-captioned writ petition has been field before

this Hon’ble Court. The contents of this application may be
treated as integral part of the petition.

2. That the electric supply of the tube-well of petitioner has been

disconnected by the respondents since 13.6.2001, in presence
of restraining orders issued vide stay order No.
EIM/RAB/4376-79 dated 13.6.2001 by the Electric Inspector,
Govt. of the Punjab Multan Region, Multan, which is
deliberate violation of law.

3. That the applicant has been deprived of earning his livelihood

through lawful profession due to illegal disconnection of
electric supply of tube-well.
4. That the matter is very much sensitive as disconnection of
supply has resulted in total ruin to crops and stopped further
cultivation/irrigation of lands for want of water which is also
tantamount to socio-economic murder of petitioner’s family.

5. That Electric Inspector, Multan Region, Multan is an

impartial/neutral forum, appointed under the Electricity Act,
1910, as well as, under Regulations of Generation,
Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act 1997, for
making determination on disputes over metering etc.

6. That the balance of convenience lies in favour of the

applicant.

7. That prima facie it is an arguable case.

8. That acts and conduct of respondents are causing irreparable

loss to the applicant.

Affidavit is attached.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the

respondents may kindly be directed to restore the
electric supply of tube-well at the earliest to avoid
further loss of the petitioner.

Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems

fit, may also be granted.
Humble Applicant,

Dated: _________

Through: -
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts,
Multan.
 IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,
MULTAN.

In re: C.M. No. _____________/2001

In
W.P. No.____________/2001

Muhammad Afzal Vs. MEPCO etc.

STAY APPLICATION.

AFFIDAVIT of: -
Muhammad Afzal S/o Shan Muhammad, caste
Sukhera, R/o Mauza Wahi Waryam, Chak No. 100/M,
Tehsil & District Lodhran.

I, the above named deponent do hereby

solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of
the above-mentioned application are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief
and nothing has been kept concealed thereto.

DEPONENT

Verification: -
Verified on oath at Multan, this _____ day
of December 2001 that the contents of this
 affidavit are true & correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.

DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH,

MULTAN.

To,
The Deputy Registrar,
High Court Lahore, Bench at Multan.

Muhammad Afzal
PETITIONER

VERSUS

MEPCO etc.
RESPONDENTS

Sir,
Will you kindly treat the accompanying petition as an urgent
one in accordance with provision of Rule 9. Chapter 3-A Rules and
orders of the High Court Lahore at Bench Multan volume V.

The grounds of urgency are: -

STAY MATTER

Yours obediently,
Dated: _________

M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts,
Multan.