Last Updated: Tuesday May 01, 2012
In the Office of the Federal Ombudsman Secretariat
Regional
Secretariat,
|
Nasir Nazir Butt S/o. Nazir Ahmed Butt, resident of House No. 74 – A, Ittefaq Street No. 4, Maqbool Road, Behind Muhammadi Mosque, Post Office Chowk Baba Azam, Ichhra, LAHORE No. 16, Post Code No. 54600 Islamic Republic of Pakistan. |
Versus |
1.
Superintendent Engineer, 2.
Executive Engineer, Gulberg Division LESCO
Wapda, G – 97, Gulberg III, 3. Sub Divisional Office, Rehman Pura Electricity Sub Division, Bukhari Market, Near Naqsha Stop, Link Wahdat Road, Lahore. |
|
Applicant |
Respondents |
Application: For rectification of electricity bill
against excess charge of units, dismissal of entire staff responsible, claim of
damages from Wapda, and continuous electricity supply without any prejudice –
Reference No. 15 1513 10371009U.
Applicant respectfully submits as under:
1. That Applicant is employed in one of the
reputed Multinational Private Organization namely ABC (Pvt.) Limited as Manager
Human Resources and is payer of income tax. Applicant is also Master in
Political Science, Master in Business Administration (Finance), and presently
student of Legum Baccalaureus (Final) in the
2. That an electricity bill received on
3. That Applicant received the revised said
electricity bill from Respondents on June 24, 2002, stating total units
consumed 167 amounting to Rs. 530/- (Rupees five hundred thirty only), last
date of payment indicating June 11, 2002, i.e., retrospective date. It was
inadequate and insufficient relief. Neither proceedings against all the
responsible staff nor their dismissal communicated to the Applicant officially
so far. Justice neither done nor seen. Principle of the “ubi jus ibi
remedium” was absent.
4. That Applicant visited the Sub Divisional
Officer, Rehman Pura, Office, on very next day, i.e.,
5. That Applicant visited the Revenue Officer,
Gulberg,
6. That in view of the above illegal act of
Respondents, the Applicant suffered from injury to his mind, loss of precious
time, and efforts made in this regard.
7. That Applicant has right to claim a total of
amount of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) from the
Respondents, in lieu of false and illegal act of the Respondents above named.
8. That the Cause of Action accrued on
9. The Applicant and the Respondents both
reside in
Under the circumstances, it is therefore
respectfully prayed that an Order for the rectification of said disputed
electricity bill as stated in the letter number NNB/LH-5/139, dated June 01,
2002, dismissal of the entire responsible staff, payment of damages of Rs.
100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) in the form of cash and not in the
form of adjustment of electricity bill, and continues supply of the electricity
to the Applicant without any prejudice, in favour of the Applicant against the
Respondents be passed with cost.
Nasir Nazir Butt
Statement:
It is hereby solemnly affirmed and declared that all the facts & figures
and contents of the Application are correct and true to the best of
information, knowledge, and belief of the Applicant and nothing has been
concealed.
It is further stated that no suit or
criminal case is pending in this regard in any court against Respondents so far
therefore this Application is not res sub judiced.
Reservation:
The amount of the damages shall be confined to the extent of Rs. 24,900/- due
to incapacity of the payment of Court Fee, where applicable in subsequent
pleading in the court of law having jurisdiction. Remaining amount of damages
shall be claimed whenever Applicant shall have afforded the payment of Court
Fee according to the law for the time being in force.
Applicant also reserves his right to bring
civil and criminal proceedings against Respondents where the relief sought is
not provided or is inadequate.
Request for advise:
Applicant hereby requests for the advise regarding the payment of current
disputed electricity bill, whether it should be paid and if so, in full or
part, and if in part, upto what extent?
Nasir Nazir Butt
Enclosures:
Copies of the following are enclosed as
under:
1. National Identity Card.
2. Current revised electricity bill, which is
still disputed.
3. Letter number NNB/LH-5/139, dated
4. Letter number NNB/LH-5/140, dated
5. Letter number NNB/LH-5/141, dated
6. Letter number 1681, dated
7. Letter number NNB/LH-5/142, dated
8. Letter number NNB/LH-5/143, dated
Mr.
Nadeem Ashraf
Director
General
Federal
Ombudsman’s Secretariat
Regional
Secretariat
15
– A,
Phone Nos. 0092-42-9201017-8.
|
Ref. No. |
NNB/LH-6/22 |
Date: |
|
Subject: Complaint
No. L/3238/2002 of
Respected Sir,
Thank you very much for the Findings on the
subject matter, dated
There are some objectionable points in such
Findings. Following are the observations, which must be taken into account
before going into final decision/order:
1. According to
paragraph 3 of the Findings, the conclusion that “no response was received from
the complainant” is totally wrong and baseless and against the facts.
Application made before the Federal Ombudsman after disappointment from the
LESCO, Wapda, dated
2. Under Points at
Issue, paragraph 4, issue regarding the amount of damages was not framed
whereas it was the integral part of the Application made before the Authority.
It should be determined in the final order.
3. Under the Hearing
Proceedings in paragraph 5 of the Findings, absence of the Complainant is
alleged, whereas the fact is that process was not effected enabling Complainant
for the appearance before the Authority as each and every communication reaches
to Complainant whichever is effected.
4. Under the former
head and paragraph, statement of the Sub Divisional Officer is wrong,
misleading, baseless, mala-fide, and against the facts as no grievance of the
Complainant has so far been redressed. The true and actual fact is that
grievance is still stand un-redressed and needs redressal with cost and
damages.
5. Under Findings of
paragraph 5, it is correct upto the extent that consumption of the units and
amount of the impugned bill was reduced but it is wrong that bill was
“CORRECTED”. The impugned bill was reduced to 167 units whereas the actual
consumption was 112 units, meaning by even than excess of 55 units. Detail is
already available on record placed before the Authority under Letter No.
NNB/LH-5/139, dated
6. It is also worth
mentioning that under survey of M&T Team, the consumption was recorded 143
units rather 167 units which is alleged corrected consumption. LESCO, Wapda has
also disregarded the report prepared by their internal department. Such finding
of M&T was shown in the register lying then in the office of Sub Divisional
Officer, Rehmanpura.
7. No administrative
and judicial action has been initiated so far against all the delinquent staff
under intimation to the Complainant, despite the lapse of one precious year
time period.
8. Neither grievance
has been redressed in its true nature as the impugned bill was not corrected at
the required level nor the amount of damages has been determined/ awarded.
Under the circumstances, it is therefore,
respectfully prayed that an Order for the redressal as stated above especially
under paragraphs 5, 7, and 8 be passed in favour of Complainant against the
Agency with cost.
Truly yours,
Nasir
Nazir Butt
House No. 74 – A,
Post Office Chowk
Baba Azam, Ichhra
Phone (Residence) 0303-6412907
Mr.
Nadeem Ashraf
Director
General
Federal
Ombudsman’s Secretariat
Regional
Secretariat
15
– A,
Phone Nos. 0092-42-9201017-8.
|
Ref. No. |
NNB/LH-6/48 |
Date: |
|
Subject: Complaint
No. L/3238/2002 of
Respected Sir,
Please refer the previous letter number
NNB/LH-6/22, dated
Despite the quite long time has been elapsed
but the said letter is still un-responded. Please expedite.
I shall be very thankful to you.
Truly yours,
Nasir
Nazir Butt
House No. 74 – A,
Post Office Chowk
Baba Azam, Ichhra
Phone (Residence) 0303-6412907
Mr.
Nadeem Ashraf
Director
General
Federal
Ombudsman’s Secretariat
Regional
Secretariat
15
– A,
Phone Nos. 0092-42-9201017-8, 9201027 (PA to
Director General).
|
Ref. No. |
NNB/LH-6/77 |
Date: |
|
Subject: Complaint
No. L/3238/2002 of
Respected Sir,
Please refer my previous letters number
NNB/LH-6/33, dated July 14, 2003 and reminder NNB/LH-6/48, dated December 18,
2003, and both are still un-responded despite of quite long time has been
passed away. Copies of both attached.
I shall be very grateful to you if the
letter referred above is responded.
Hope for the favourable reply.
Truly yours,
Nasir
Nazir Butt
House No. 74 – A,
Post Office Chowk
Baba Azam, Ichhra
Phone (Residence) 0303-6412907
Enclosure: (as above)
In the Office of the Federal Ombudsman Secretariat
Regional
Secretariat,
|
Nasir Nazir Butt S/o. Nazir Ahmed Butt, resident of House No. 74 – A, Ittefaq Street No. 4, Maqbool Road, Behind Muhammadi Mosque, Post Office Chowk Baba Azam, Ichhra, LAHORE No. 16, Post Code No. 54600 Islamic Republic of Pakistan. |
Versus |
1.
Superintendent Engineer, 2.
Executive Engineer, Gulberg Division LESCO
Wapda, 244 – A, Shahrah-e-Roomi,
3. Sub Divisional Officer, Rehman Pura Electricity Sub Division, Bukhari Market, Near Naqsha Stop, Link Wahdat Road, LAHORE. |
|
Applicant |
Respondents |
Application: Complaint against defiance of
recommendation under paragraph number 7 & 8 of the Findings on complaint
number L/3238/2002 of
Applicant respectfully submits as under:
1. That complaint number L/3238/2002,
registration number
2. That under paragraph numbers 7 & 8 of
the above Findings, Agency was bound by law to implement the recommendations
and initiation of the disciplinary action against the delinquent staff.
3. That the said implementation and an
initiation of disciplinary action could not be taken within the
statutory/stipulated time period of one month. This could be taken on the
application for implementation submitted by the applicant. Such delay in
implementation itself constitutes mal-administration on the part of Agency.
4. The impugned implementation is illegal, ultra
vires, and mala-fide inter alia on the following:
GROUNDS
i)
The
disciplinary action initiated under Memo 2330, dated
ii)
The
above disciplinary action is hit by Article 11(3) as the communication received
by Ombudsman could not be forwarded to the complainant within the time
stipulated.
iii)
The
Memo No. 2330, dated April 01, 2004, does not disclose cause as to why it is
issued beyond the stipulated time period, i.e., after a month period and hit by
Article 11(5).
iv)
The
impugned implementation lacks application of statutory provisions of Article 12
read with 11(2), (3), and (5) of the Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi
Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983.
v)
The
impugned implementation does not disclose that such disobedience has been made
part of the personal file of the respondents.
vi)
The
punishment against contempt has not been imposed.
vii)
The
amount of cost has not been determined in favour of applicant.
Under the circumstances above, it is
therefore respectfully prayed that an Order requiring the disciplinary action
along-with contempt against respondents, making the disciplinary action
along-with contempt the part of their personal files be passed with cost.
Nasir Nazir Butt
Statement:
It is hereby solemnly affirmed and declared that all the facts & figures
and contents of the Application are correct and true to the best of
information, knowledge, and belief of the Applicant and nothing has been
concealed.
It is further stated that no
suit or criminal case is pending in this regard in any court against
Respondents so far therefore this Application is not res sub judiced.
Nasir Nazir Butt
Enclosures:
Copies of the following are enclosed as
under:
1. Copy of Memo.
2. Copy of Findings.
3. National Identity Card.
Dated:
Go to About Author | LL. B. – I | LL. B. – II | LL. B. – III | LL. B. Directory | Track Record | Home