Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2026 SHC 1451
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Petitioner: Const. P. 3283/2026 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Asif Maqsood (Petitioner)
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2026 SHC 1451. In this matter between Const. P. 3283/2026 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Asif Maqsood (Petitioner) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 3283/2026 (D.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2026 SHC KHI 1451 PARTIES: Asif Maqsood (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 15-JUL-26 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ 1
ORDER SHEET THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH KARACHI
Constitutional Petition No. D – 3283 of 2026 [Asif Maqsood versus Federation of Pakistan & others]
DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(S) Before: Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry
Date of hearing & order : 15-07-2026
Mr. Umer Ilyas Khan, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Furkan Al i, Advocate for Respondent No.3 along with Mr. Irtazaa Afzal, G.M. (Legal), K -Electric and Mr. Haider Hassan Shah, Manager (Legal), K-Electric. Ms. Mehreen Ibrahim, D.A.G. along with Mr. Abid Hussain, Advisor, NEPRA, Islamabad.
********** O R D E R Adnan-ul-Karim Memon, J. The petitioner, Asif Maqsood , has filed the instant Constitutional Petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeking directions to the respondents to ensure a stable and uninterrupted supply of electricity to his property by repairing or replacing the existing feeder, without imposing any additional charges upon him, and to restrain respondent No.3 from taking any coercive action, including disconnection of electricity or issuance of any extra bill. 2. Initially learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, a businessman and proprietor of Teepo Industries International , lawfully acquired the subject industrial property through a registered lease from the Government of Sindh and, after obtaining all requisite approvals from the competent authorities, including the Town Municipal Corporation, the Electric Inspector, and respondent No.3, paid all charges and fulfilled every statutory requirement for an industrial electricity connection. He added that d espite compliance wi th all formalities, the connection was energized only after considerable delay and has since been subjected to 14 -16 hours of daily load shedding due to an admittedly faulty feeder. It is submitted that repeated requests to respondent No.3 for repair of th e existing feeder or shifting the connection to a stable feeder, as well as a complaint before respondent No.2 (NEPRA), have remained unattended, causing severe financial losses and adversely affecting the petitioner’s industrial operations. Learned counse l contends that the respondents have failed to discharge their statutory obligations under the NEPRA Act, 1997, the Electricity Act, 1910, the Electricity Rules, 1937, and the NEPRA Performance Standards (Distribution)
Rules, 2005, thereby violating the pe titioner's fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 4, 9, 14, 18, 24 and 25 of the Constitution. It is, therefore, prayed that Respondent No.3 be directed to ensure a stable and uninterrupted electricity supply by repairing or changing the feeder witho ut imposing any additional charges upon the petitioner, and that the respondents be restrained from taking any coercive action, including disconnection of electricity or issuance of any extra demand or bill.
3. When confronted with the position that the p etitioner has already approached the competent authority, i.e., National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA), by filing a complaint under Section 39 of the Regulation of Generation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act, 1997, regardi ng excessive load shedding and failure of K -Electric Limited to provide stable electricity supply, as such he may avail remedy before that forum . He submitted that the complaint has been registered by NEPRA vide Complaint Tracking No. KElectric-KHI-73219-05-26, and comments have been sought from K -Electric by the Consumer Affairs Department , he , therefore, requests that the competent authority may kindly be directed to decide the pending complaint expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month, in a ccordance with law, so that the petitioner may not continue to suffer due to prolonged inaction.
4. When confronted with this position, the counsel for the respondents agreed to such disposal in these terms.
5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy before the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA), which is seized of the matter and has sought comments from K -Electric Limited, this Court is of the view that the grievance of the petitioner is required to be adjudicated by the competent regulatory authority in accordance with law. Since learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to such course of action, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to NEPRA to decide the pending complaint bearing Complaint Tracking No. KElectric-KHI-73219-05-26 expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, after providing opportunity of hearing to all concerned. The parties shall remain at liberty to place all relevant material before the competent authority, and NEPRA shall pass a speaking order strictly in accordance with law. [ 6. This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
JUDGE JUDGE SHAFI