' MAMOON RASHID SHEIKH, J. --- Grievance is made out that the petitioner has been over billed by the respondent-LESCO for the month of May, 2015 even though the petitioner has only consumed thirty-five (35) units of electricity. A prayer has, therefore, been made that the respondent-LESCO may be directed to issue a bill to the petitioner according to his consumption of electricity.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent-LESCO submits, under instructions, that the electricity meter of the premises in question has been changed as the previous meter was found to be "dead stop". The impugned bill has been issued on the basis of the "one day average" electricity consumed by the petitioner. As such the impugned bill is in accordance with the tariff/rules.
3. Further submits that as per his instructions there is no previous outstanding against the petitioner in respect of the meter/connection in question. If the petitioner were to pay the current bill no penal action shall be taken against the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner expresses satisfaction over the above statement. She, however, submits that due to the huge amount of bill the petitioner may be allowed to pay the impugned bill in instalments.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent- LESCO submits, under instructions, that the petitioner may pay the current/impugned bill in two (2) equal instalments. The first instalment to be paid within a week and the second along with the next bill.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner expresses her satisfaction and prays that the petition may be disposed of accordingly.
7. The petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent-LESCO to forthwith issue a revised bill to the petitioner so as to enable him to make payment in instalments as