Summary
- The Lahore High Court (LHC) has dismissed a constitutional petition challenging the imposition of capacity charges and electricity tariffs in power bills, declaring the plea non-maintainable.
- The court observed that it could not assume the role of a regulator, auditor, or economist in matters involving economic and regulatory policies.
- Justice Arshad observed that issues relating to capacity charges and electricity tariffs are matters for policymakers and regulatory authorities to address.
The Lahore High Court (LHC) has dismissed a constitutional petition challenging the imposition of capacity charges and electricity tariffs in power bills, declaring the plea non-maintainable. The court observed that it could not assume the role of a regulator, auditor, or economist in matters involving economic and regulatory policies.
In a detailed six-page judgment, Justice Ahmad Nadeem Arshad dismissed the petition filed by Ashba Kamran. The court held that policymaking in the energy sector falls within the domain of the government and Parliament, not the judiciary.
The judgment emphasized that courts cannot function as appellate forums for reviewing economic, financial, and regulatory policies. It stated that mere disagreement with a policy does not constitute sufficient grounds for invoking constitutional jurisdiction.
Justice Arshad observed that issues relating to capacity charges and electricity tariffs are matters for policymakers and regulatory authorities to address. The court reiterated that it is not empowered to act as a regulator, auditor, or economic expert in such matters.
The judgment further noted that the petitioner had failed to establish any violation of fundamental rights. The court maintained that judicial intervention for the protection of constitutional rights is warranted only when an action is shown to be unlawful or unconstitutional.
Referring to the principle of separation of powers, the court stressed that the judiciary must exercise restraint in matters concerning executive and administrative functions. The judgment also held that directing the recovery of payments made to Independent Power Producers (IPPs) does not fall within the court’s jurisdiction and that policymaking cannot be undertaken by the judiciary under the guise of public interest litigation.
The petitioner had challenged the recovery of capacity charges and tariffs through electricity bills and sought a comprehensive review of the regulatory framework governing the power sector. However, the Lahore High Court declared the petition non-maintainable and dismissed it accordingly.
