Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KADIR BAKHSH VS Respondent: WAPDAHonorable Justice MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ
1988 C L C 1615
1988 C L C 1615
[ Karachi]
Before Muhammad Zahoorul Haq and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ
KADIR BAKHSH‑‑Petitioner
versus
WAPDA and others‑‑Respondents
Constitutional Petition No. D‑202 and Miscellaneous Application No. 470 of 1987, decided on 31st March, 1987.
(a) Electricity Act (X of 1910)‑‑
‑‑S. 14‑‑‑Installation of electric poles‑‑Electricity, being for benefit all and WAPDA having authority of putting poles in different Places, held, could not be restrained from putting electric lines on fixed on petitioner's land as same would be against public interest‑‑If petitioner wanted that any particular person should not be supplied electricity from those poles then petitioner should have impleaded that person as respondent‑‑Compensation however had to be offered to owners of land where poles were fixed.
(b) Electricity Act (X of 1910)‑‑
‑‑‑S. 14 (2)‑‑Installation of electric poles‑‑Compensation to affected persons‑‑Duty of WAPDA‑‑Even if no application for demand of compensation was made by petitioner on whose land poles for supply of electricity were fixed, WAPDA, held, should have offered compensation to petitioner otherwise WAPDA could be burdened with responsibility of illegal action.
ORDER
MUHAMMAD ZAHOORUL HAQ, J.‑‑According to the comments of the respondent, WAPDA the electric poles had already been installed on the site. However, they are to be strengthened by the cementation. It would not be reasonable to stop the cementation of the electric poles as the electricity is for the benefit of all. Under section 14 of WAPDA Act, the WAPDA has the authority of putting the poles in different places. It is, however, a different matter that the compensation has to be offered to the owners of the land, where the poles are fixed We, therefore, do not restrain the WAPDA from putting the electric lines oh the poles as the same would be against the public interest. If the petitioner wants that any particular person should not be supplied electricity from those poles, then the petitioner should implead that person as respondent in this petition and then alone the petitioner's grievance could be redressed.
There is no application before us for the demand of compensation, but it is only fair that the WAPDA should have offered the compensation to the petitioner as provided in section 14(2), otherwise they could be burdened with the responsibility of illegal, action.
This disposes of Miscellaneous 470 of 1987.
H.B.T./K‑76/K Order accordingly