ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
C. P. No. D – 1073
of 2018
|
Date of hearing |
Order
with signature of Judge |
1.
For hearing of CMA No.5716/2018 (S/A)
2.
For hearing of main case
(Notice
issued to Law Officer SEPCO and Advocate)
15.08.2018
Ms.
Shanila Erum, Associate of Mr. Qurban Ali Malano,
Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. T.
David Lawrence, Advocate for respondents / SEPCO.
Mr. Nisar
Ahmed G. Abro, Deputy Attorney General.
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
The substantial
question in this petition is issuance of detection bill. It has been pointed
out by the counsel appearing for the respondents / SEPCO that necessary and
appropriate party “SEPCO” has not been arrayed. He further pointed out that the
petitioner had already approached the Electric Inspector for redressal of his
grievance as the application in terms of para 7 and 8 is pending before him.
We have heard the
learned counsel and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem
it appropriate to direct the Electric Inspector to adjudicate the questions in
the grievance application pending before him preferably within a period of
eight (08) weeks. Insofar as the detection bill is concerned, although authority
of SEPCO for issuing detection bill on its own is questionable however in case the
petitioner apprehends disconnection, he may deposit 50% of the disputed amount
with the Electric Inspector; whereafter, the Electric Inspector may pass
appropriate orders to restrain SEPCO authorities from disconnecting the
electricity connection as the application of petitioner is already pending.
We have been
observing that in a number of cases that the dispute concerning metering
equipment are being dealt with by licensee / electric supply companies, and the
companies are becoming judge of their own cause and are issuing detection
bills. In terms of Section 26 Sub-Section 6 of the Electricity Act, 1910,
it is only the prerogative of the Electric Inspector to look into such issues
that relates to electric equipments and its faultiness; and, the power generating
or supplying companies cannot issue a detection or supplementary bill as it encroaches
upon the Electric Inspector’s jurisdiction under Section 26 Sub-Section 6 of
the Electricity Act, 1910. Insofar as illegal abstraction of electricity is
concerned, that is where no faultiness of the electrical equipment is pointed
out, no doubt the companies are at liberty to act in accordance with law, they
may also lodge an FIR, but the consumption is to be assessed as to how much
electricity was consumed illegally and unlawfully which is based on the maximum
energy consumed through maximum demand indicator, in a given period of time by
the consumer and based on that average bills in terms of the contracted and
connected load amount could be assessed and recovered. Even this connected load
is to be adjudged by Electric Inspector. None of these exercises are being was carried
out, hence, we expect that the companies shall act keeping in mind their powers
and authority under the Electricity Act insofar as their future course is
concerned.
The petition and
listed application stand disposed of
in the above terms.
J U D G
E
J U D G
E
Abdul Basit