ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR.

Constt: Petition No.D- 3095 of 2012.

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

FOR KATCHA PESHI.

11^th. May, 2016.

Mr. Ameer Ahmed Shaikh, Advocate for Respondents No.3 to 5.

Mr. Mian Mumtaz Rabbani, D.A.G.

Petitioner and his Counsel called absent, no intimation received. Through instant petition, the petitioner has expressed his grievance regarding electricity bill issued by the SEPCO authorities. However, record shows that after having filed instant petition, the petitioner and his Counsel have not remained vigilant to proceed with the matter. According to learned Counsel for respondents the petition is misconceived as the alternate remedy is available to the petitioner under the Electricity Act, which has already been availed by the petitioner who has filed a complaint before Electric Inspector, Sukkur in respect of subject bill.

Accordingly, instant petition is disposed of with direction that petitioner that he may continue to seek the remedy which has already been availed in the instant matter, by approaching the Electric Inspector who shall decide the complaint within short period, whereas, SEPCO authorities are also directed to ensure that petitioner may be given reasonable opportunity to explain his position before taking any adverse action against the petitioner with regard to disputed bill.

JUDGE

JUDGE

A.R.BROHI