PLJ 2011 Lahore 661
[Multan Bench Multan]
[Multan Bench Multan]
Present:
Tariq Javaid, J.
ABDUL
GHANI--Petitioner
versus
SUB-DIVSIONAL
OFFICER (E) MEPCO S/TOWN SUB-DIVISION, BUREWALA, DISTRICT VEHARI and 2
others--Respondents
W.P.
No. 3259 of 2010, decided on 27.4.2010.
Constitution
of Pakistan, 1973--
----Art.
199--Constitutional petition--Disconnection the supply of electricity--Supply
of electricity was basic necessities--Allegation of--Not paying for consumption
of electricity--Request for electricity connection was refused--Validity--Under
rule Reference No. 24 of Commercial Procedure no electricity connection could
be provided to any person who was not owner of the property or in alternative
who could not procure "NOC" from landlord as in the instant case, the
petitioner was not owner of the property wherein connection was sought to be provided--No
entitled to the same--Petition was allowed. [P.
662] A
Constitution
of Pakistan, 1973--
----Art.
38--Basic necessity--Electricity--State is under obligatory to provide basic
necessities of life to the citizens--Basic necessities of life had not been
defined--Various basic necessities are enumerated in Art. 38(d) of Constitution
which includes housing--It cannot be said that framers of Constitution
envisaged housing without electricity, therefore, electricity supply is also a
basic necessity--Petition was allowed. [P.
664] B
Ch.
Pervaiz Akhtar Gujjar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr.
Zia Ullah Khan, Advocate
along with Fayyaz Hussain,
S.D.O WAPDA for Respondents.
Date
of hearing: 27.4.2010.
Order
It
is maintained that the petitioner is worker in Burewala
Textile Mills and there is dispute going on between the Mill Management and labourers, due to that dispute electricity supply of the
petitioner has been disconnected. In the previous round of litigation the
respondents were directed to supply the electricity to the petitioner and
charge him to the extent of his consumption but allegedly the respondents did
not comply with the order and electricity of the petitioner has been
disconnected.
2. On the other hand, it is alleged that the
petitioner is trespasser; that he has no right to be on the premises; he is in
illegal occupation and is not entitled to the facility of electricity.
3. Case has been heard at length and it is
admitted to regular hearing and fixed for hearing for today.
4. This case involves supply of electricity
which is the basic necessity and the controversy between the petitioner and
employer is subjudice before the appropriate forum.
Allegedly the petitioner is trespasser and he has no right to remain on the
premises but this does not authorize the respondents to disconnect electricity
being supplied to the petitioner. However, taking lenient view the petitioner
was advised in the previous round of litigation to seek his independent
electricity connection for the reasons being that Mill Management/Respondent
No. 3 was likely to raise objection that the petitioner was not paying for the
consumption of electricity; therefore, the petitioner applied for electricity
connection which has been refused by Respondents No. 1 & 2 on the pretext
that under rule/Reference No. 24 of, the Commercial Procedure no electricity
connection could be provided to any person who was not owner of the property or
in the alternative who could not procure "No Objection Certificate"
from the land lord as in the present case the petitioner is not owner of the
property wherein connection is sought to be provided; therefore he is not
entitled to the same. Reference No. 24 of the Commercial Procedure is re
produced below:--
(i) Ownership
proof from the applicant
(ii) An affidavit from the owner that no
connection existed previously at the premises on which connection is applied
and that he would pay Wapda dues in respect of the
connection which already existed at the premises in question, if noticed
here-after.
(iii) "No Objection Certificate" from
the land lord (if the applicant is a tenant along with land lord's proof of
ownership, and affidavit mentioned above.
(iv) Attested copies of National
Identify Cards of the applicant and the witness.
(v) The power of attorney (in case of a
limited company), in favour of the applicant to the
effect that the applicant is authorized to sign the application and execute
agreement.
(vi) In case of a Limited Company, the
list of Managers, Directors etc. with complete addresses and attested photo copies
of all documents regarding registration of the limited Company.
(vii) In case of change of name/reconnection, a
certificate from the Revenue Officer Wapda to the
effect that no arrears are outstanding against the premises.
(viii) In case of reconnection, affidavit from
the applicant to the effect that he will be liable top pay all dues which would
appear/come to light after issue of the certificate referred above.
5. It appears that the interpretation given to
Reference No. 24 by the respondents is violative of
Article 38 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, which is
re-produced herein below, for facility of reference :--
38.
The State shall
(a) secure the well-being of the people,
irrespective of sex, caste, creed, or race, by raising their standard of
living, by preventing the concentration of wealth and means of production and
distribution in the hands of a few to the detriment of general interest and by
ensuring equitable adjustment of rights between employers and employees, and
landlords and tenants;
(b) provide for all
citizens, within the available resources of the country, facilities for work
and adequate livelihood with reasonable rest and leisure;
(c) provide for all
persons employed in the service of Pakistan or otherwise, social
security by compulsory social insurance or other means;
(d) provide basic necessities of life, such
as food, clothing, housing, education and medical relief, for all such
citizens, irrespective of sex, caste, creed or race, as are permanently or
temporarily unable to earn their livelihood on account of infirmity, sickness
or unemployment;
(e) reduce
disparity in the income and earnings of individuals, including persons in the
various classes of the service of Pakistan; and
(f) eliminate riba as early as possible.
6. It is apparent from clause (d) of the above
Article that the State is under obligatory to provide basic necessities of life
to the citizens. The basic necessities of life have not been defined. Various
basic necessities are enumerated in Article 38(d) which includes Housing. It
cannot be said that the framers of the constitution envisaged housing without
electricity; therefore, electricity supply is also a basic necessity. This
appears to be a term of act. It had different meanings at different times.
Facilities which were not basic necessities twenty years ago may very well in
these days be basic necessities. Undoubtedly electricity is one of those. It
could very safely be termed as basic necessity; therefore, Reference No. 24 of
the Commercial Procedure merits to be struck down as it has been given an
interpretation whereby a citizen is being denied the basic necessity. It is
repugnant to the constitution. If a landlord or employer wants to eject any
person from the property, under the law he is obliged to adopt legal procedure.
If he is allowed to disconnect electricity then certainly he shall disconnect
other facilities like water supply and natural gas and thus illegally evict the
tenants from the rented premises. In other words whenever, a landlord or owner
of premises wants to illegally evict the occupant he shall disconnect the
supply of necessities and then refuse to issue "No Objection
Certificate". By reason whereof the Respondents No. 1
& 2 shall also not supply the electricity to him. This cannot be
allowed. No illegal interpretation can be placed on any instrument nor could
any rule be allowed to remain operative which is open to malafide
interpretation. This would tantamount to arming the landlord with a weapon
which could easily be used against the tenant by disconnecting the electricity
and forcing his illegal eviction without adopting proper procedure provided
under the law. Even in this case Respondent No. 3 appears to have disconnected
the supply of electricity to coerce the petitioner by denying the basic
necessity and thus, force his eviction otherwise than the due process of law.
7. For what has been discussed above, this
petition is allowed, respondents are directed to install electricity meter at
the residence of the petitioner, restore his connection forthwith and
consequently the Reference No. 24 of Commercial Procedure is struck down with
no order as to costs.
(R.A.) Petition
allowed.
