JUDGMENT CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.- The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:- "It is prayed that the writ petition be accepted directing the respondent not to resort to illegal and un-warranted action regarding recovery of fake amount till the matter Is finally adjudicated upon by the competent Court (Electricity Magistrate Sunny View, Lahore)."
2. The learned counsel of the petitioner submits that the respondent installed electricity meter of the petitioner crossed the road of the house of the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner could not theft the electricity. He further submits that the respondent has no lawful authority to recover the amount in question from the petitioner unless and untill the criminal care has been finalized by the Competent Court. He further submits that action of the respondent is without lawful authority and is based on malice. He further submits that the respondent has no lawful authority to initiate civil and criminal proceedings against the petitioner at one time.
3. The learned Standing Counsel of the respondent (WAPDA) entered appearance on Court's call, he submits that the writ petition is not maintainable.
4. 1 have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties and perused the record myself.
5. It is admitted fact that the respondent got a case . Registered against the petitioner vide FIR No. 123/2002 under Section 39-A of Electricity Act, at Police Station Shahdara Town, Lahore. The petitioner filed W.P. No. 16338/2002 with the prayer for the quashment of said FIR. The same was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 7.11.2002. The petitioner had also filed Writ Petition No. 1720/2003 with the said prayer i.e. "the respondent be restrained to recover the amount in-question from the petitioner till final adjudication by the competent Court/Electricity Magistrate," which was dismissed for non- prosecution by this Court vide order dated 7.2.2003. It is settled principle of law that principles of CPC are applicable in Constitutional proceedings, as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in "Hussain Bakhsh's case" (PLD 1970 S.C. I), therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable qua the same subject-matter and relief in view of Section 1 1 of CPC, as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in "Pir Bakhsh's case" (PLD 1987 S.C. 145).
It is also settled principle of law that criminal and civil proceedings can be initiated simultaneously, In arriving to this conclusion, I am fortified by the law laid down in "Talib Hussain v. Anar Gul Khan and 4 others" (1993 S.C.M.R. 2177). The writ petition is also not maintainable in view of law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in "WAPDA and others v. Mian Muhammad Riaz and another" (PLD 1995 Lah. 56).
In view of what has been discussed above, the writ petition has no merit and the same is dismissed.