ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) on Monday overturned a judgment made by the Lahore High Court (LHC) that had previously declared the collection of fuel price adjustment (FPA) applied to monthly electricity bills as illegal.
The apex court, led by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, proclaimed the LHC’s ruling as “impractical both constitutionally and legally.”
It further noted that the appellate tribunal of the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (Nepra) is the appropriate authority to handle this intricate matter, not LHC.
The three-member bench directed petitioners to file an appeal before the Nepra Appellate Tribunal within the next 10 days. The tribunal, in turn, was directed to expedite the hearing and reach a decision within the statutory time frame.
This decision came as a response to an appeal filed by power distribution companies (Discos) which contested the LHC’s ruling.
During the proceeding, advocate Salman Akram Raja, representing the Discos, argued that the formation of Nepra itself was unconstitutional when the fuel price adjustment was initiated in May 2022.
CJP Isa challenged this stance and emphasised that if there were constitutional concerns about Nepra’s formation, they should have been addressed separately.
Justice Athar Minallah further clarified that neither the SC nor any other court had jurisdiction over the technical matters of Nepra. The LHC’s decision, in this context, was perceived as overstepping its boundaries.
The attorney general affirmed that both Nepra and Discos are open to resolving the matter through the appropriate tribunal.
The apex court also directed that the outstanding dues from companies and industries following LHC’s initial decision will now be subject to the Nepra Appellate Tribunal’s verdict.
LHC’s verdict
In February, LHC had declared the fuel price adjustment (FPA) in electricity bills as illegal, observing the demand for FPA, quarter tariff adjustment and change of status of tariff from industrial to commercial by Nepra not constituted fully under section 3 of the NEPRA Act, 1997.
LHC’s Justice Ali Baqar Najafi had disposed of more than 3,000 petitions challenging the authority’s mandate and had directed the respondent Nepra not to charge any exorbitant tariff beyond the paying capacity of the domestic consumers.
He had also directed Nepra to provide maximum subsidy to domestic consumers consuming up to 500 units per month.
