"\u003chtml xmlns:o=\"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office\"\r\nxmlns:w=\"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word\"\r\nxmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40\"\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003chead\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta http-equiv=Content-Type content=\"text/html; charset=windows-1252\"\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=ProgId content=Word.Document\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=Generator content=\"Microsoft Word 9\"\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=Originator content=\"Microsoft Word 9\"\u003e\r\n\u003clink rel=File-List href=\"./2000J8_files/filelist.xml\"\u003e\r\n\u003ctitle\u003eCLOG ON DISCRETION\u003c/title\u003e\r\n\u003c!--[if gte mso 9]\u003e\u003cxml\u003e\r\n \u003co:DocumentProperties\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Author\u003ecosmos\u003c/o:Author\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Template\u003eNormal\u003c/o:Template\u003e\r\n  \u003co:LastAuthor\u003eSaif\u003c/o:LastAuthor\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Revision\u003e5\u003c/o:Revision\u003e\r\n  \u003co:TotalTime\u003e0\u003c/o:TotalTime\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Created\u003e2002-04-11T05:44:00Z\u003c/o:Created\u003e\r\n  \u003co:LastSaved\u003e2003-01-03T07:03:00Z\u003c/o:LastSaved\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Pages\u003e1\u003c/o:Pages\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Words\u003e564\u003c/o:Words\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Characters\u003e3220\u003c/o:Characters\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Company\u003eoratier\u003c/o:Company\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Lines\u003e26\u003c/o:Lines\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Paragraphs\u003e6\u003c/o:Paragraphs\u003e\r\n  \u003co:CharactersWithSpaces\u003e3954\u003c/o:CharactersWithSpaces\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Version\u003e9.2720\u003c/o:Version\u003e\r\n \u003c/o:DocumentProperties\u003e\r\n\u003c/xml\u003e\u003c![endif]--\u003e\u003c!--[if gte mso 9]\u003e\u003cxml\u003e\r\n \u003cw:WordDocument\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:View\u003eNormal\u003c/w:View\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing\u003e2.85 pt\u003c/w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery\u003e2\u003c/w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery\u003e\r\n \u003c/w:WordDocument\u003e\r\n\u003c/xml\u003e\u003c![endif]--\u003e\r\n\u003cstyle\u003e\r\n\u003c!--\r\n /* Style Definitions */\r\np.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal\r\n\t{mso-style-parent:\"\";\r\n\tmargin:0in;\r\n\tmargin-bottom:.0001pt;\r\n\tmso-pagination:widow-orphan;\r\n\tfont-size:12.0pt;\r\n\tfont-family:\"Times New Roman\";\r\n\tmso-fareast-font-family:\"Times New Roman\";}\r\n@page Section1\r\n\t{size:6.35in 841.7pt;\r\n\tmargin:.75in 0in 2.9pt .35in;\r\n\tmso-header-margin:.5in;\r\n\tmso-footer-margin:.5in;\r\n\tmso-paper-source:0;}\r\ndiv.Section1\r\n\t{page:Section1;}\r\n--\u003e\r\n\u003c/style\u003e\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\u003cbody lang=EN-US style=\u0027tab-interval:.5in\u0027\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cdiv class=Section1\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent:\r\n.5in\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003eCLOG ON DISCRETION\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027margin-left:2.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent:\r\n.5in\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003eBy\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003cspan style=\"mso-spacerun:\r\nyes\"\u003e                             \u003c/span\u003eM. Qasim Khan Khattak, Advocate,\r\nKarak, (N.\u0026#8209;W.F.P.)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003eDiscretion\u0027 makes its own place\r\nnot necessarily in a given situation, is always obedient to a special statute\r\nor in other words a special statutory law can bar or act as clog on the\r\njudicial exercise of discretion is to be based on equity good conscience and\r\nare inherent to a common man of the society demands as well on the same path.\r\nThe same is the case with general law but subject to exceptions.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003eTaking example of section 54\u0026#8209;C\r\nof Electricity Act, 1910, an Act got much familiarity in the present reign, is\r\nin discriminate application. The consumers have been put by it to the wholesale\r\nand blind exercise of discretion of sending huge amount, of bills assessed by\r\nthe concerned WAPDA Authorities on their sweet\u0026#8209;will not in consonance of\r\nthe Act or Rules framed thereunder. Lawyers and Advocates know cases of double\r\njeopardy or in contravention of section 24 of the Act and it is the point in\r\nquestion between these two instances will be consequently elucidated with the\r\nhelp of another example. Once a consumer is charged for electricity theft or\r\nuse of method prohibited by the law is debited with assessment units or charges\r\nfor a particular period, normally six months and called stealing charges. The\r\nmode of which assessment has been prescribed in section 26\u0026#8209;A of the Act\r\ndoes not allow to charge the same consumer again within the said period already\r\ncharged for, otherwise the case becomes of double jeopardy. If such a case\r\ncomes before our Courts from top to bottom denies the interim relief unless the\r\ncondition of deposit on protest has been made by the plaintiff in accordance\r\nwith the order of the Courts have so far showed inability to handle with the so\u0026#8209;called\r\nbar\u0026#8209;in\u0026#8209;section 54\u0026#8209;C contains that if a notice under the Act\r\nhad been served on the consumer or his supply has been disconnected the Court\r\nshall not issue interim prohibitory or mandatory injunction unless the impugned\r\namount has been deposited in accordance with the order. According to section 24\r\nrequirement of such notice is sine qua non if the consumer has not been\r\nassessed for stealing charges. In simple words if a consumer is charged for\r\nstealing charges cannot claim protection of section 24 of the Act equalises to\r\nthe former example. \u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u0027Now if a poor person of domestic\r\nconsumption up to a one kilowatt is sent with a bill of unreasonable amount for\r\ninstance of Rs.1,00,000 for six months and he is charged again for the same\r\namount in the next month will face the situation of disconnection of supply at\r\nleast as according to our Courts, the bar contained in section 54\u0026#8209;C does\r\nnot allow the Courts to issue injunction. Even if this situation with incidence\r\nof unreasonable amount or in case of double jeopardy are crystal clear before\r\nthe Court and away from the exercise of forced discretion albeit the maxim ubi\r\njus ibi remedium\u0026#8209;cum- injuria sin damnum are in thorough judicial\r\napplication if not resorted to in the set examples would mean let the State to\r\nloot and there becomes the state of the law of jungle. Rule of prudence,\r\nnatural justice or reason demands its application to remove hardships or\r\ninconvenience being caused or threatened to be caused by elements of injustice\r\nor unlawful bearings. Derogation from the law is never allowed by our Courts\r\nare Constitutional can touch vires of legislation.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003eAlbeit section 54\u0026#8209;C of the\r\nAct prima facie contains a bar has taken the name of clog on discretion,\r\nnevertheless, can be removed in a fit case of unreasonableness or of double\u0026#8209;jeopardy\r\nwith a prayer to amend every law in modern form. If the injunctive situation\r\ncomes before a subordinate Court can remove the clog by deriving its inherent\r\npowers but the best would be for our higher Courts to eliminate the clog on\r\ndiscretion to remedy the blind adherence to section 54\u0026#8209;C of the Act.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify\u0027\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal\u003e\u003c![if !supportEmptyParas]\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c![endif]\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/div\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/body\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/html\u003e\r\n"