Professor ZIA-UR-REHMAN KHAN and others vs CHAIRMAN, WAPDA, LAHORE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a writ petition regarding the disconnection of electricity supply to the petitioner's premises. The petitioner had initially filed a declaratory suit with a prayer for a prohibitory injunction, seeking the restoration of power. The trial court granted an interim mandatory injunction, but conditioned the restoration of electricity on the petitioner's compliance with the LESCO policy requiring the installation of an independent transformer. The petitioner challenged this condition through a civil revision and subsequent writ petition, both of which were dismissed. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner argued that the conditional injunctive order provided no effective relief and requested its recall. The Supreme Court observed that the disconnection resulted from the petitioner's failure to adhere to a notice requiring the installation of an independent transformer to prevent overloading the distribution system. Consequently, the Court granted the petitioner's request to recall the conditional injunctive order, allowing the trial court to proceed with the suit on its merits in accordance with the law.
- Can a court grant an interim mandatory injunction for the restoration of electricity subject to compliance with departmental policy?
- Is a petitioner entitled to recall an interim injunctive order if they argue it provides no effective relief?
ORDER
' FALAK SHER, J.--- Aggrieved by the disconnection of power supply petitioner amongst others preferred a declaratory suit with prohibitory injunction against the respondents along with an application seeking an interim order for restoration of energy which was granted on 26-8-2002, with the following operative part:- "Keeping in view the assertions narrated in the plaint and the fact that due to disconnection the plaintiffs are suffering loss, an interim mandatory injunctive order is passed with the observation that subject to doing the needful in accordance with the policy decision of the LESCO for independent transformer the plaintiff's electricity connection be restored immediately."
' Grudging against the condition attached he preferred a Civil Revision No,10 of 2002 which was dismissed by a learned Additional District Judge, Lahore on 26-9-2002 against which his Writ Petition No,18266 of 2002 was also dismissed and subsequently the Review Application No,155 of 2002 met with the same fate vide order, dated 1-11-2002. Hence the captioned petition for leave to appeal.
2. Wherein, it transpires that the disconnection of the power supply had matured upon non- adherence to the notice served by the respondent which is reproduced herein below:-- "Office of the Sub-Divisional Officer Bhatti Gate S/Division LESCO, Lahore No,354-SS ' Mr. Proprietor, Iqra Center, Ghazni Street.
' Subject: Installation of connection in commercial plaza without Transformer.
' During course of checking it has been observed that 32 Nos. Single phase and 1 No, three phase connections installed at your premises without independent transformer due to which the existing distribution system became highly over loaded; which is not according to the policy of department.
' You are, therefore, advised to supply through approved consultant of department for independent transformer of your plaza within 10 days after the receipt of this notice failing which your all existing connections will be disconnected without further notice and also in case of damaging of distribution transformer of locality, the cost of damaged transformer will be recovered from you.
Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhatti Gate Sub-Division LESCO, Lahore. c.c.---to:
(1) The Xen. Fort Division, LESCO for his kind information and necessary action please."
3. The learned counsel concluding the arguments submitted that the injunctive order has not bestowed any relief to the petitioner, therefore, the same be recalled.
4. Accordingly, granting the request, the injunctive order is hereby recalled and the trial Court may proceed with the suit in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Cited by 1 case
- Nasir Abbas Bhatti vs Abid Hussain, etc 2023 LHC 4457, 2024 CLC 268, 2023 PLJ Lahore 820