Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 2508 2023 SLD 2508 2023 PLJ 403
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.As. No. 1011 to 1119 of 2020 & 1185 to 1191 of 2020and C.Ps.No. 3428 of 2020, 1145-K of 2020 & 3775 to3780 of 2020,decided on 19.1.2023.(Against thejudgment dated 28.09.2020 and 05.10.2020 of the High Courtof Sindh, Karachi passed in C.P. Nos. D
Present: UMAR ATA BANDIAL, CJ, SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH AND MRS. AYESHA A. MALIK. JJ.
Mr. Abid S. Zuberi, ASC and Mr. Ayan Mustafa Memon, ASC for Appellants. Mr. Haider Waheed, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 1119/2020). Mr. M. Omer Soomro, ASC for Appellants (in C.A. No. 1191/2020). Mr. Haider Waheed, ASC for Petitioners (in C.Ps. No. 342

K-ELECTRIC LIMITED through Chief Executive Officer, Karachi and others--Appellants

VERSUS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Energy and Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad and others--Respondents

Law: Registration, Voluntary Registration and De-Registration Rules, 1996

Section: 3,7,31,31(3)

Law: National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (Tariff Standards and Procedure) Rules, 1998

Section: 3,16

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1962

Section: 199

Regulation of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act, 1997 (XL of 1997)-- ----Ss. 3, 7, 31, 31(3)--National Electric Power Regulatory (Tariff Standards and Procedure) Rules, 1998, Rr. 3 & 16--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Issuance of corrigendum--Schedule for electricity tariff--Modification in Industrial Support Package (ISP)--ISP was adjusted in tariff--Reducing of tariff--Subsidy was no longer applicable for off-peak hours--Writ petitions--Disposed of--Withdrawal of subsidy partially by way of SRO--Question of whether disputed corrigendum is enforceable against consumers of K-Electric--Whether Federal Government can determine a uniform tariff and notify it without any determination from NEPRA--Consumers grievance--No vested right--Challenge to--Consumers’ grievance, they challenged issuance of Corrigendum, as it was not routed through NEPRA--Federal Government is well within its right to introduce, modify or withdraw subsidies--There is no vested right in favour of consumer with reference to a subsidy, simply because subsidy is built into tariff--Impugned judgment failed to appreciate significance of SOT, which was necessary for K-Electric to give effect to SRO 810, because SRO 575, which provided SOT for uniform tariff for K-Electric, included benefit of SRO 12-- Federal Government and K-Electric place this matter before NEPRA for adjustments, so as to ensure that the Consumers adjust all amounts which they have received by way of the subsidy (SRO 12) for off-peak hours (SRO 810)--As this adjustment means adjustment to the uniform tariff it must be done by NEPRA after following due process--Petitions before High Court were without merit, Consumers have no vested right to claim benefit of a subsidy, which is based on Government policies--Hence, their petitions were liable to be dismissed--Appeal dismissed. Regulation of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act, 1997 (XL of 1997)-- ----S. 7--Powers and functions of authority--Authority is exclusively responsible for regulating provisions of electric power services and that Authority is to determine tariff, rates, charges and other terms and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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