WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and 2 others vs PAK SARTAJ
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) against an interim order of the High Court passed in a constitutional writ petition concerning the respondent's electricity bill liability and subsequent disconnection. The core legal question raised before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in directing the restoration of the respondent's electric supply and extending interim relief despite the constitutional bar under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 regarding the limited duration and continuance of stay orders. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the High Court complied with the constitutional limitations on interim orders. In the interim, treating the matter as a fresh application for stay, the Supreme Court directed the respondent to furnish fresh adequate security within one month, failing which WAPDA would be entitled to disconnect the electric supply and pursue recovery of the disputed amount alongside market profits.
- Whether the High Court can extend an interim stay order beyond the constitutional time limits prescribed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Whether restoration of disconnected electricity supply can be ordered as interim relief pending the determination of the validity of an expired stay order?
- Under what terms and conditions may the Supreme Court grant interim protection regarding disputed electricity bills during the pendency of an appeal?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the WAPDA, against an interim order passed by the High Court, in a Writ Petition filed by the respondent relating to the respondent's liability to pay electricity bill and its consequences.
2. ' The High Court, had in an earlier order stayed the recovery of the amount subject to the furnishing of security. After expiry of necessary period, during the hearing of a miscellaneous application, the High Court noted the petitioners' plea that the stay of recovery could not be continued any further, they relied upon the bar in this behalf contained under Article 199 of the Constitution. A learned Judge in the High Court issued necessary notice and further observed and ordered as follows:-- "As the electric supply to the petitioner's premises has been disconnected while the order of this Court dated 5-5-1985 directing restoration of the electricity was subsisting and it is yet to be decided whether that order had ceased to be operative or not after the expiration of six month's period, it appears just and expedient that the electric supply be restored to the petitioner.
3. Respondents arc, therefore, directed to restore the electricity to the petitioner forthwith. It may be observed in passing that I have taken notice of the fact that the petitioner had already furnished the security for the disputed amount in pursuance of this Court's order dated 5-5-1985 and the petitioner is stated to be paying the monthly bill regularly."
4. Learned counsel has contended with respect that the learned Judge in the High Court fell into error in not complying with the Constitutional bar regarding continuance of the stay order.
5. ' After hearing the learned counsel we consider it a fit case. For grant of leave to appeal to examine the pleas raised and other connected questions. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted.
6. ' In the meanwhile treating this for purpose of jurisdiction of this Court as a fresh case and order, vis-a-vis, the grant of stay, we direct that the respondent shall furnish fresh adequate security to the satisfaction of the Assistant Registrar (1) at Lahore with the condition that; in case of failure the disputed amount shall be paid together with customary market profits from the date the High Court passed the original order of stay. The needful in this behalf shall be done within a month after the receipt of notice by the respondent in this behalf, failing which the petitioner would be entitled to resort to disconnection amongst other methods for the recovery of the amount concerned. If they resort to disconnection prior information shall be laid before this Court also.
7. ' Appeal shall be prepared on present record with direction to parties to file all essential documents.