Decision to provide consumers relief remains with govt

DCOs asked to explain why relief from lower petrol prices has not trickled down to common man.

LAHORE: Removal of four electricity surcharges by the Lahore High Court can provide substantial relief to consumers if the government doesn’t raise the electricity tariff in the near future.

LHC declared the equalisation surcharge, debt-servicing surcharge, the universal obligation fund surcharge and the Neelam-Jhelum surcharge unconstitutional. The court also directed authorities to refund the amount recovered from consumers under these surcharges.

Economics experts say that the government already has plans to end subsidy on electricity in the upcoming budget.

While the LHC’s order promises consumers some relief, the ball is remains in the government’s court.

Heading a division bench, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah of the LHC struck down Section 31(5) of the Regulation, Transmission and Distribution of Electric Power Act, 1997, under which the surcharges were being collected. The bench passed the order on 270 petitions challenging the surcharges. The court also dismissed the federal government’s application requesting it to suspend operation of its verdict for two weeks.

Prices of edible items

A single bench of the LHC passed directions to all DCOs of the Punjab to submit analyses of the prices of edible items after a decrease in the price of petrol.

Justice Farrukh Irfan Khan was hearing a petition seeking directions to the government for appropriate action against traders involved in black marketing, hoarding and excessive profiteering.

The judge observed that government officers had failed to perform their responsibilities as essential edible items remained out of the reach of the common man ahead of Ramazan. He observed that the federal food secretary was responsible for taking steps to ensure price reduction. The court will resume hearing on the matter on June 15.

Lawyers protest

Lawyers in the city continued to protest all of last week over the killing of two of their colleagues in Daska. The Punjab Bar Council joined the lawyers in protest despite an undertaking, before the LHC chief justice a few weeks earlier, that they would not boycott court proceedings. The PbBC had said that they would record their protest in other ways and would not boycott court proceedings. However, lawyers stayed away from the courts throughout the province for most of the week.

Various representative bodies of lawyers also developed differences on strategy in the wake of the Daska incident. There was a lot of mudslinging between the bodies and allegations of conspiracy and foul intent made rounds throughout the week.

Some Lahore Bar Association members alleged that the Punjab Bar Council was trying to ally with the government against lawyers. The PbBC said the same against members of the Pakistan Bar Council and the Supreme Court Bar Association. Some members of the Lahore Bar Association raised similar allegations against president of the Lahore High Court Bar Association, Pir Masood Chishti. Chishti tried to convince them of his loyalties and dissolving into tears and swearing allegiance to the lawyers’ cause. It is highly unlikely that lawyers will protest any further. The government has already promised Rs20 million as compensation for the families of the two deceased lawyers and Rs2.5 million for every lawyer injured in the incident.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 1^st, 2015.