To,

The Superintending Engineer,

MEPCO Ltd., Bahawalpur Circle,
Bahawalpur.

Subject: - Excessive wrong billing due and defective T.O.D.

meter in respect of M/s Gulistan Textile Mills,
Samma Satta, Bahawalpur.

Dear Sir,

It is submitted that, on our request, you alongwith

X.E.N., Operation Division, Bahawalpur, Regional Manager
M&T-II Region, MEPCO, Multan and other concerned staff visited
our Mills premises on 11.4.2002 and checked the functioning of the
metering equipment. The accuracy of Ferrari Type (Conventional)
energy meter was found within the permissible limits of error. The
total consumption registered by T.O.D. meter was found comparable
with that recorded by conventional meter, but the T.O.D. meter was
not able to record correct readings in off peak and peak hours (clock
work of peak & off peak hours disturbed.) A detection test/check
proforma duly signed by the members of committee was endorsed to
concerned quarters by X.E.N. Operation Division, MEPCO, Multan
vide his No. 12449-54 dated 29.4.2002. with special direction to
R.O. MEPCO, Bahawalpur for calculation of net amount according
to the Technical Committee’s recommendation.

It is pertinent to point out that energy bill amounting to

Rs. 27,54,600/- for the month of 4/2002 was issued on the basis of
readings recorded by the defective T.O.D. meter. The matter was
brought to the notice of Executive Engineer, MEPCO, Bahawalpur,
vide our letter dated 26.4.20002 and it was also pointed out that an
amount of Rs. 17,539/- has been included in the bill due to wrong
application of tariff, which may also be adjusted but no action was
taken by the said officer. However, the bill for 4/2002 was paid
under protest.
 It is regretted to say that inspite of our repeated requests
for change of defective meter and issuance of bills on the basis of
readings recorded by correct meter at Samma Satta Grid Station
(after due consideration of line losses) till the defective meter at
Mills is changed, a wrong bill amounting to Rs. 15,65,700/- for the
month of 5/2002 was again prepared/issued on the basis of reading
recorded by defective T.O.D. meter. The issue was again raised
before X.E.N. Operation Division, MEPCO, Bahawalpur, but he
advised to make the payment and did not initiate any action to get
the disputed bill revised.

We were compelled to put up the case before the

learned Electric Inspector, Multan and stay order No. 5645 dated
24.5.2002 was granted with a copy to your office as well.

Thereafter, the concerned MEPCO functionaries have

not submitted proper reply to petition before the learned Electric
Inspector, Multan and are seeking adjournments by applying
negative tactics and creating hindrance in the process of
adjudication.

On the other hand, we have tried to settle the issue

amicably but all in vain. We deposited the disputed bills amounting
to Rs. In the accounts of MEPCO as desired by X.E.N.
MEPCO Bahawalpur. Moreover, we made a payment of
Rs. 10,00,00/- (on a manually prepared advance bill) to meet
MEPCO’s “June problem” on the personal assurance of X.E.N.
(Operations) MEPCO, Bahawalpur that this amount will be
refunded/adjusted in the energy bill for the month of July/2002.

We are sorry to say that inspite of our best efforts to

maintain good terms with your company and sincere co-operation,
the concerned MEPCO functionaries have again issued a wrong bill,
in which an amount of Rs. 176,663/- has been included without any
justification, whereas this amount was excluded from the previous
bills on the direction of the learned Electric Inspector, Multan, vide
his letter No. dated . Moreover, as
promised by X.E.N. (Operations) MEPCO, Bahawalpur, the amount
of advance bill of Rs. 10,00,000/-, which was deposited in
June/2002, was to be refunded/adjusted in the bill for July/2002, but
the promise has not been fulfilled. (Copy of advance bill and current
bill for 7/2002 are Annexes “A & B”.).

In view of the above-mentioned circumstances,

we think it more appropriate to invite your kind attention
towards our genuine and lawful claims, which need to be
settled at the earliest to avoid further complications. It is very
well known to all the concerned officers that MEPCO’s own
record speaks in our favour. The T.O.D. meter has been
declared defective by MEPCO’s own Technical Officers. The
defective meter has also been changed. There seems to be no
plausible reason or justification to delay the settlement of
dispute.

It is therefore, requested to kindly look into the

matter personally to advise the concerned officers to issue
correct revised bill for 7/2002 so that the payment is made in
time. Moreover, our accounts may kindly be overhauled in
the light of Technical Committee’s report with effect from
21.2.2000 (date of installation of T.O.D. defective meter) to
get the issue resolved finally at an early date.
Yours faithfully,

Dated: ________
For Gulistan Textile Mills,

Manager

C.C. to: -

The Chief Executive, MEPCO Ltd., Khanewal Road, Multan,

for his kind information and necessary action. It may kindly be seen
that a very genuine and lawful issue has not been settled in 3-1/2
months which could, otherwise, be settled within a couple of weeks
on receipt of Technical Committee’s report.
To,

The Commercial Manager,

Gulistan Textile Mills,
Tibba Sultan Pur,
Vehari.

Subject: - Travelling Expenses.

Dear Sir,
The undersigned will appear before the Hon’ble
Advisory Board, Lahore, in appeal titled MEPCO etc. Vs. M/s
Gulistan Textile Mills on 27.7.2002. Kindly arrange for payment
of Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand rupees only) in advance to meet
with the travelling expenses.
Yours faithfully,

Dated: 23.7.2002
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri
Advocate
 Office of:
M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,
Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.

To,
The Superintending Engineer,
MEPCO Ltd., Multan Circle,
Multan.

Subject: - Power of Provincial Office of Inspection/Electric

Inspector.

Sir,

I have received your letter issued vide endst: No. 25224

dated 24.02.03. Sorry to say that I have different view on the subject.
It seems that the above-said letter has been issued in a haste,
perhaps, due to mistaken view of the letter issued by G.M. (C.S.)
WAPDA Lahore and misconception of the contents of judgment of
the Hon’ble Apex Court, quoted therein. There is no controversy on
the binding force of the precedents in our judicial system, but these
are to be applied by observing certain principles.

In my opinion, a Tribunal or Forum, which performs

judicial or quasi-judicial functions under an Act, has powers to take
steps as are necessary for the exercise of its jurisdiction even though
its jurisdiction may be of limited nature. The forum of Electric
Inspector is functioning in exercise of powers conferred by sections
24, 26(6), 36 & Schedule V of the Electricity Act, 1910 and section
38 of R.G.T.D. of Electric Power Act, 1997. The licensee or
consumer (parties to dispute) cannot decline to accept the powers of
the Forum/Tribunal vested in it by law. They may decline to accept
the decision of Electric Inspector and in case of any grievances, may
refer the matter to the Provincial Government.

In the best interest of Authority, I have to convey my

point of view on the subject. Please do consult for seeking legal
advice/opinion from the eminent and genius lawyers on WAPDA
Panel of Advocates at Multan. In the mean time, the lower
formations (X.E.N’s/S.D.O’s/R.D.’s) may continue to contest the
cases before the learned Forum, by raising objection of jurisdiction
on case to case basis where applicable. It is the court who will
decide the controversy and not the parties to the case, as one cannot
be a judge of one’s own cause. So, it is, in no way, advisable to write
the Court/Tribunal/Forum that “NEITHER SUCH CASE WILL
PERSUADE NOR DECISION WILL BE COMPLIED HAVING
BEEN NOT LEGAL AUTHORITY.”

M. Ashraf Nadeem Sabri,

Advocate High Court,
28-District Courts, Multan.

C.C. to: -

1. The Secretary, Irrigation & Power Department, Govt. of

Punjab, Lahore with reference to G.M. (C.S.) WAPDA,
Lahore, letter No. 214-23/GMCS/DG(C)/D(R&C)/96963
dated 04.02.03, for his kind information.

2. The Electric Inspector, Govt. of the Punjab, Multan for his

kind information.