WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN)’S SECRETARIAT

CLOSURE FINDINGS
Complaint No : WMS-HQR/0002367/20

Date of Registration : 12.03.2020

MR. TARIQ MEHMOOD BAIG S/O MUHAMMAD

Name & Address of the : TAJ R/O HOUSE NO.38-B, GULISTAN-E-JINNAH,
Complainant
FAIZABAD MURREE ROAD, RAWALPINDI.
Name of the Agency : SUI NORTHERN GAS PIPELINES LIMITED
complained against (SNGPL)
Name & Designation of the : Abdul Khaliq, Senior Advisor, H.O. Islamabad.
Investigating Officer, Station
MALADMINISTRATION IN PRESCRIBED
Brief Subject :
PROCEDURE OF BILLING
Date when IO asked for report : 13.03.2020
from Agency
Date of Receipt of Agency’s : 27.04.2020
report in WMS
: i)              Number: 03
Number & Dates of Hearing
ii)            Dates: 26.03.2020, 22.04.2020, 29.04.2020
Name and Designation of the
Agency’s Representative who  : M. Usman, Executive Officer Billing and Adnan Saeed,
attended the hearing Xen, SNGPL

Whether the complainant

attended the hearing? : Yes

  The complainant, Mr. Tariq Mahmood, a consumer of domestic gas connection,

complained of maladministration in the process of billing amounting to Rs.117,440 charged to
him during December 2019 through a detection bill. He contended that he received a bill in the
month of November 2019 without reading which he had deposited on 23.12.2019. Accordingly,
he visited the SNGPL office and submitted application with the request to replace the meter on
20.12.2019; despite its replacement, the Agency charged a bill of Rs.117,440 in December 2019.
Thus, he approached the Agency and requested to withdraw the bill and replace his meter.
Unfortunately, a defective meter had been installed by the Agency at his premises. He again
approached the Agency for rectification of the bill and replace the defective meter but to no
avail. He prayed that the Agency should be directed to attend his grievance.

2. The Agency, in its report dated 27.04.2020, stated that the complainant’s defective meter
bearing No.MR02751327 was replaced with new meter No.ZT07374936 on 10.06.2019 and sent
to Central Meter Shop (CMS) for flow proving. Later on, the said meter was replaced with
another meter No.ZT08280151 on account of some doubt. According to Meter Inspection Report
(MIR) that both index seals had been tampered and meter flow proving were not reliable due to
tampering. Thus, 100% cost of meter was recovered from consumer on account of meter charges.
Since, tampering of meter had been established in the light of MIR, the matter was referred to
Detection and Evaluation (D&E) Committee for thorough checking. As a result, the complainant

 
was charged a detection bill of Rs.24,240 after the fulfilment of requisite formalities, according
to OGRA policy, to recover the loss sustained by the Agency.

-2- WMS-HQR/0002367/20

3. Three hearings were held on 26.03.2020, 22.04.2020 and 29.04.2020 which were
attended by both the parties. The Agency’s Representative (AR) reiterated his position as stated
in the report. The AR apprised that the complainant intentionally defected the meter and he was
involved in theft of energy to derive undue monetary benefits. Moreover, the connection was
disconnected due to non payment of bills. Thus, the detection bill charged by the Agency was
according to the set procedure. However, the AR stated, on record, that if the complainant could
submit 40% payment of his bills, his connection would be restored within two days. Moreover,
for his satisfaction, the matter will be referred to Review Committee for examination of
tampering charging for appropriate relief and the complainant will also be called for personal
hearing. The complainant agreed to the proposal, on record, made by the Agency; thus, with this
mutual understanding between the complainant and the Agency, no further investigation is
required.

4. In view of position stated in para 3 above, the case is closed in terms of

Regulation 23 (1) (h) of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation and Disposal of Complaints)
Regulations, 2013.

(SYED TAHIR SHAHBAZ)

WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN)