1. Reply to show cause notice appended with a memo of attendance and termination order of one Jamshid Malik, along with report at the instance of respondent No.1 placed. Reply submitted to the application for claim of setting aside of ex-parte proceedings.
2. Arguments heard.
3. Having gone through the arguments advanced by the both sides and record, it is revealed that applicants/respondents were duly served through their terminated employ Jamshid Malik for 14- 01-2008 but they failed to appear, resultantly they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 29-01-2008 and during further proceedings of the case, when evidence of the complainant was likely to be recorded, it transpired that fate of whole case rested upon documents and the deep examination of record, in the possession of applicants/respondents was necessary, consequently, they were again summoned for the production of record, while directing the Registrar of this Court, to communicate the respondents for their personal appearance alongwith record and again despite personal service, as reported by the Registrar of this Court, applicants/respondents failed to put-up their appearance, which shows that like other Govt.
4. Departments, respondents also flouted the orders of this Court and did not bother to pay any heed .
5. It was the juncture when this Court was constrained to direct SHO concerned to ensure the appearance of the respondents, which responded positively. This time respondents sought time, for placing detailed report about the present picture of the billing to the complainant.
6. On 31-01-2008 instead of detailed report, a vakalatnama of Mr. Sana-Ulklah advocate was placed and time was sought for placing above mentioned detailed report, accordingly, as per their request the matter was adjourned for 02-02-08, when again applicants/respondents failed to place required report and instead, application for setting aside ex-parte ORDER SHEET.
7. Proceedings was submitted, even, no reply to show cause notice issued to the respondent No.1 was placed. The matter was again adjourned for two days at the request of respondents, however, on the adjourned date the above required report was submitted, according to which no outstanding/arrears were pending against complainant and reply to show cause notice coupled with termination order of Jamshid Malik and attendance Shoukat Ali, dated 31-01-2008, was also submitted.
8. While minutely scanning the conduct of respondents/applicants, it is, crystal clear that their conduct is tainted with mala-fide and casual tendency, which cannot be left unnoticed. It is not disputed that a propensity is grown amongst the Govt. Departments that they do not bother to pay heed to the Court's orders and public/consumers rights. Accordingly no plausible justification or explanation is manifest from the record to allow the claim of applicants/respondents for setting aside exparte orders. While adding to it, it is, also depicted that no affidavit, in support of application to justify their claim, is also appended, hence, this Court has no other option to hold that the claim of applicants/respondents is hollow and without substance, thus, finding no force therein, the same is hereby, turned down.
9. While dealing with the pros and cons of the case, it is, reflected from the face of the record that complainant is paying his monthly bills through bank, in favour of the SNGPL but despite regular payments he was shown as defaulter since January, 2007 and thereafter he started setting his bills corrected in order to pay his bills and respondents were used to delete the arrears, in routine without taking any step to eliminate the chances of future arrears in this respect. All this makes crystal clear that the conduct and respondents/ SNGPL was casual and they never bothered to make their record upto date, in order to save the complaint from further inconvenience/discomforts and complainant after finding no other way approached this Court for redressal of his grievance.
10. During the arguments and hearing the case of parties, it was argued by learned counsel for the respondents that complainant suffered inconvenience due to non transmission of prompt voucher by the bank, where bill was paid. No matter, it was fault of the bank, which is partner of the respondents but no law permits to justify for continuation of the inconveniences/sufferings to the consumers. Respondents may sue against the bank or may invent any other device to save consumers from sufferings/inconveniences.
11. While concluding the crux of the matter and avoiding further discussion, it is, proved and established that complainant met serious sufferings/inconvenience due to negligent act of the respondents for about more than one year and as per usual and casual tendency, respondents did not bother to streamline their record hence, this Court has no other option to award an amount of Rs. 8,000/- (Rupees Eight Thousand only), as compensation, on account of sufferings to the complainant, in favour of the complainant against the SNGPL/respondents payable within one month, failing which the respondent will be dealt strictly, in accordance with law.
12. Before parting with the orders this Court has no other option but to express that it is not unusual that Govt. Deportments/public functionaries do not bother to the sufferings faced by their consumers, as a result of which, the consumers are constrained to visit offices of the public functionaries/Govt. Offices for the redressal of their grievances and for corrections of the bills, in order to get deleted their undue arrears and concerned officials, while correcting the bills do not bother to make the record upto date. Thus Managing Director, General Manager SNGPL, Lahore and Deputy General Manager, SNGPL Gujranwala are directed to ensure the keeping of the billing record upto date while alleviating the consumers, sufferings/ inconveniences in future, under intimation to this Court with in One Month positively. They are also directed to supervise the billing record directly and to pass directions to the concerned officials to keep-up their record upto dates. A copy of this order be sent to above mentioned officers, as well as, respondent No. 1 for compliance.
13. As for as, the show cause notice to respondent No.1 is concerned which stands answered in the way that he shall be careful in future to the Court's orders, failing which he will be taken to task. File be consigned to the record room.