Fazal Muhammad V. Managing Director Sui Gas, Quetta,

PLD 2023 Balochistan 36Balochistan High CourtCriminal Law2023

Bench: Iqbal Ahmed Kasi

Share on WhatsApp
P L D 2023 Balochistan 36 Before Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and Iqbal Ahmed Kasi, JJ FAZAL MUHAMMAD ---Petitioner Versus MANAGING DIRECTOR SUI GAS, QUETTA---Respondent Constitution Petition No. 1841 of 2022, decided on 29th November, 2022. Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act (XI of 2016) --- ----S. 6---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition--- Procedure for complaints and suits for default before Gas Utility Courts ---Alternate remedy ---Scope ---Case of petitioner was that due to som e construction work in the street, a driver of an unknown tractor hit the gas connection of the house of petitioner, due to which the gas meter was damaged ---Petitioner informed the authorities of Sui Southern Gas Company Limited with regard to the inciden t, but the Company lodged a false FIR against him and also issued a claim letter directing the petitioner to pay certain amount being the value of gas consumed on account of direct use of gas ---Petitioner deposited an installment of the amount and it was assured by the Company that if he got acquitted of the charge, the amount would be readjusted/returned to him ---Petitioner, after his acquittal, approached the Company to return the amount but it refused to do the needful ---Validity ---Dispute between a cons umer and a licensee of natural gas was to be governed under the Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016--- Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016, was comprehensive enough to regulate the matters connected with S. 6 of the Act ---Said Act contained th e procedure for filing of a complaint and the procedure to be adopted by the Gas Utility Court for redressal of the grievances on receiving of the complaint ---Petitioner was required to set into motion the relevant provisions and to avail proper remedy, but he directly approached the High Court in constitutional petition, which was not permitted under the law ---Constitutional petition was dismissed. Abdul Hayee Bangulzai for Petitioner. Date of hearing: 21st November, 2022. ORDER IQBAL AHMED KASI, J. ---The instant Constitutional Petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 ("the Constitution"), carries the following prayer clause: "It is therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of above made submissions, the fine order SUI Southern Gas Company dated 26 November 2020 and 12 March 2021 against the fundamental rights and further the Gas authorities be directed to restore the Gas connection of the petitioner and also directions be issued to the respondent to readjust the submitted amount of installment of Rs. 642500 in the upcoming bill or be directed to return the said amount in the interest of justice, equity and fairplay. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that due to some construction work in the street, a driver of an unknown tractor hit the gas connection of the house of the petitioner, due to which the gas meter was damaged. He informed the authorities of the Sui Southern Gas Company Limited (hereinafter 'the Company") with regard to the incident, but the Company lodged a false FIR against him and also issued a claim letter dated 26th November, 2020 (hereinafter 'the impugned letter') directing the petitioner to pay Rs.2,569,600/ - within 15 days of receipt of the claim letter being the value of gas consum ption on account of direct use of gas for the period from 25.08.2019 to 24.08.2020. After receiving the claim letter, the petitioner deposited Rs.6,42,400/ -, vide challan dated 12th March 2021, in the account of the Company, and it was also assured by the Company to the petitioner that if he gets acquitted of the charge, the said amount will be readjusted/returned to him. The petitioner further averred that after his acquittal of the case, vide order dated 22nd June, 2021, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sari ab Division, when he approached the Company to return the said amount, initially the Company lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other and finally refused to do the needful. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone thr ough the record of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner only narrated the facts as noted down in the petition and added nothing except acquittal of the petitioner from criminal case. Since, the matter in hand pertains to use of natural gas, while t he petitioner approached this Court in capacity of retail consumer for natural gas for redressal of his grievances. The status of petitioner as of consumer of the Company, was not denied, while filing of criminal case against him for the offence punishable under Sections 24, 17, 15 and 2 of the Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016 (hereinafter "the Act of 2016") was also a fact. The record further describes that the petitioner was booked in a criminal case, but he was acquitted of the charge by the Sessions Judge, Sariab Division, vide order dated 22nd June 2021. 4. Before going into the further merit of the case, it is to be kept in sight that the matter in hand pertained to issuance of letter/notices dated 26th November, 2020 and 12th March 2021, with regard to imposition of fine of Rs.25,69,600/ -, as value of the gas consumed by the petitioner. It appears that the dispute was between consumer and a licensee of natural gas, thus, the matter was to be governed by the Act of 2016. The Act of 2016 is comprehensive enough to regulate the matters connected with Section 6 of the Act of 2016. Subsection (2) of Section 6 of the Act of 2016, includes making of regulations to provide procedure for resolving dispute amongst the licensee, consumer and use rs of open access facilities. It contains the procedure for filing of a complaint and the procedure to be adopted by the authority for redressal of the grievances on receiving of the complaint, thus, it would be appropriate to reproduce Section 6 of the Ac t of 2016, which reads as under: "6. Procedure for complaints and suits for default before Gas Utility Courts. ---(1) Where a person is involved in an offence under this Act or where there are sums due or recoverable from any person, or where a consumer has a dispute regarding billing or metering against a Gas Utility Company, a consumer or Gas Utility Company, as the case may be, may file a complaint or suit, as the case may be, before a Gas Utility Court as prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908) or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898) (2) The plaint shall be supported by a gas sales agreement or gas bill or such other documentation that evidences such contract or obligation. Copies of the plaint, statement of dues and other relevant documents shall be filed with the Gas Utility Court in sufficient numbers so that there is one set of copies for each defendant and one extra copy. (3) The plaint, in the case of a suit for recovery instituted by a Gas Utility Company, shall specifically state. - (a) the quantity of gas consumed or extracted by the defendant from the Gas Utility Company; (b) the amount, if any, paid by the defendant to the Gas Utility Company and the dates of payment; and (c) the total dues relating to the supply, consumption or extraction of gas and all other dues by the defendant to the Gas Utility Company up to the date of institution of the suit. (4) On a plaint being presented to the Gas Utility Court, a summons in Form No.4 in Appendix 'B' to th e Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act V of 1908) or in such other form as may, from time to time, be prescribed by rules, shall be served on the defendant through the bailiff or process server of the Gas Utility Court, by registered post acknowledgment due, by courier and by publication in one English language and one Urdu language daily newspaper, and service of summons duly effected in any one of the aforesaid modes shall be deemed to be valid service for purposes of this Act. In the case of service of the summons through the bailiff or process server, a copy of the plaint shall be attached therewith and in all other cases the defendant shall be entitled to obtain a copy of the plaint from the office of the Gas Utility Court without making a written applic ation but against due acknowledgment. The Gas Utility Court shall ensure that the publication of summons takes place in newspapers with a wide circulation within its territorial limits." 5. In view of quoted provision, an alternate remedy was available to the petitioner in his status as of consumer of natural gas against the Company, but he avoided. In addition, it is also not denied that the petitioner is consumer of natural gas and is in contract with the Company for supply of gas for commercial use. The meter was also installed on the premises, which was admittedly removed and the connection was disconnected on the allegation of tampering. The execution of contract between the parties for the purpose was admitted. The outcome of discussion is that the law provides a proper procedure for resolution of dispute between a consumer and licensee and the laws framed there under are in addition thereto, thus, the provisions of law were to be adhered to by the parties. The petitioner was required to set into motion the relevant provisions and to avail the provided remedy, but he directly approached this Court in Constitutional Petition, which is not permitted under the law. Furthermore, the Government of Pakistan, after promulgating the Act of 2016, also constituted the Utility Courts, vide notification No. SRO No.(1)/2016 on 1st August 2016, which in our view is the alternate remedy/proper forum with the petitioner to redress his grievances. Thus, in view of above discussion, the instant petition before this Court is not maintainable for want of alternate remedy, as such, the same is hereby dismissed in limini, however, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the proper forum, provided under the law. SA/30/Bal. Petition dismissed.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Re-Investigation can be permitted under special circumstances

PLJ 2020 · Balochistan High Court · 2020

Importance of 342 Statement in a Criminal Trial

PLJ 2018 SC 453 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Prosecution must establish that chain of custody was unbroken, unsuspicious, indubitable, safe and secure

PLJ 2018 SC (Cr.C.) 90 · Balochistan High Court · 2018

Domicile and Residence Certificate are different

PLJ 2013 · Balochistan High Court · 2013

Pakistan - The Registration Act 1908

Balochistan High Court · 2012