| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2541 2016 SLD 2541 2016 YLR 1 |
Lahore High Court
I.C.A. No. 146 of 2015, heard on 3rd June, 2015. Date of hearing: 03-06-2015.
AYESHA A. MALIK AND FAISAL ZAMAN KHAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Shahzad Shaukat for Appellant (in I.C.A. No.146 of 2015). Hafiz Ahsan Ahmad Khokar for Appellant (in I.C.As. Nos.196 to 199 of 2015). Umar Sharif for
Respondents.
I.C.A. No. 146 of 2015, heard on 3rd June, 2015. Date of hearing: 03-06-2015.
AYESHA A. MALIK AND FAISAL ZAMAN KHAN, JUSTICE
Muhammad Shahzad Shaukat for Appellant (in I.C.A. No.146 of 2015). Hafiz Ahsan Ahmad Khokar for Appellant (in I.C.As. Nos.196 to 199 of 2015). Umar Sharif for
Respondents.
MESSRS RANA TEXTILES LTD. THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE
VS
. SUI NORTHERN GAS PIPELINES LTD. THROUGH AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Establishment of Office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order (1 of 1983)--- ----Arts. 2(2) & 11---Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority Ordinance (XVII of 2002), Ss. 11 & 42---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S. 3---Intra-Court appeal---Maladministration and Complaint Resolution Procedure---Appellant was consumer of natural gas who invoked jurisdiction of Ombudsman against issuance of incorrect utility bills---Validity---In case of a complaint filed before Ombudsman element of maladministration committed by agency or its employees had to be highlighted---Ombudsman was not to look into or decide about fate of act which followed act of maladministration---If the Ombudsman arrived at a conclusion that there was a consequence to an act of maladministration, he could make his recommendations under Art. 11 of Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983, which could include undoing of the act done in consequence of act of maladministration---Cases to the extent of maladministration could be looked into and decided by the office of the Ombudsman, however, the issues which fell within the ambit of dispute resolution mechanism provided under Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002 and NEPRA Act, 1997, the same were to be adjudicated upon and decided by available foras---Division Bench of High Court declined to interfere in passed by Single Judge of High Court as the same was unexceptionable and did not require any interference---Intra-court appeal was disposed of accordingly. Capital Development Authority through Chairman and another v. Zahid Iqbal and another PLD 2004 SC 99; The Prince Glass Works Ltd. v. National Beverages Ltd. and another PLD 1987 Kar. 49; Shafaatullah Qureshi v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2001 SC 142; Capital Steel Re-rolling Mills v. Managing Director SNGPL Lahore and another PLD 2012 Lah. 174; Almas Khanum v. Federation of Pakistan and others 1994 MLD 6 and Rahat Hussain v. Collector of Customs (Rev.) Customs House Karachi and 2 others 2003 CLC 1860 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: FAISAL ZAMAN KHAN, JUSTICE:----------- Through this consolidated judgment, we intend to decide I.C.As. Nos.146 and 196 to…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492