' The brief facts in the instant writ petition are that the petitioner is an employee of Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Faisalabad, under the management of respondent No,1; that the Institute has a Colony where the Staff has been given residence through allotment and one- of the residence is allotted to the petitioner. The colony is named as Staff Colony. WAPDA has been supplying electricity at C-2 Tariff at bulk rate to the aforesaid Institute. The Institute was charging domestic rate for the electricity used by the employees/occupants of Staff Colony. The respondent No,1 took a sudden turn when audit took place in their Institute and they informed all the occupants of the Staff Colony that w,e,f, June, 2001 they would be charged at the rate of Rs,6 per unit (the commercial rate at which the Institute is getting electricity from WAPDA). In this respect a letter No, SOA(Audit)(258)96/97(CEP) R-C-1-D, dated 26-6-2001 was issued to the petitioner and all the occupants of the Staff Colony. They also issued demand notices of huge amounts from all of them for the past arrears alleged to have accumulated against them by calculations on the basis of new demands. Being aggrieved the occupants of Staff Colony (286 in number including the petitioner) filed a suit in the Civil Court, Faisalabad for a declaration that the said action is illegal and without lawful authority. They filed an application under Order 39, rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. Praying that pending disposal of the suit the defendant be restrained from charging the impugned commercial rate from the plaintiffs. The learned Civil Judge, Faisalabad rejected the application for interim injunction vides order, dated 30-7-2002. An appeal was preferred which too was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Faisalabad vide his order, dated 10-10-2002. Both the impugned orders of the learned lower Courts are challenged through the instant writ petition.
2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the-petitioner are that it is a well-settled and recognized procedure all over the world that the person who makes use of any facility for his domestic purpose cannot be charged differently than the one, who uses the same for commercial purposes and that even in Pakistan all the departments such as WAPDA, WASA and Sui Gas Company have separate Tariff for domestic and commercial consumers and it is the vested right of every citizen that they would be charged at domestic rate electricity for their domestic purpose and they cannot be deprived of their right as all citizens of Pakistan have equal rights and if the petitioner and other residents of the Staff Colony are charged commercial rates as against other citizens of this country, who get electric supply on domestic rate, it will clearly amount to discrimination which has been condemned by the Constitution. Even otherwise it is not plausible and convincing excuse that since the Institute is getting electricity from WAPDA on commercial rates the supply to residents of Staff Colony on domestic rates will cause loss to Government as it is a big task for the Government or Institute to obtain a separate line from WAPDA for its Staff Colony to resolve the issue for ever. The learned Courts below have not appreciated the real points and rejected the plea for interim injunction mechanically.
3. Since WAPDA was a necessary party to be heard, therefore, they were summoned through the learned A.A.-G. And the respondent No,1. The representative of WAPDA strongly resisted and submitted that the domestic Tariff will cause a heavy loss to the WAPDA as other departments will also come and demand the same facility. He brought to the notice of the Court the definition of industrial supply in the Schedule of Electricity Tariff for WAPDA Companies and submitted that for the purpose of this tariff the supply given in bulk at one point to the consumers having their own distribution facilities, i,e, own H.T. Lines and distribution transformers etc. For further distribution within their respective jurisdiction. Since Ayub Agricultural Research Institute is getting the bulk supply, therefore, they have the jurisdiction to distribute the same on the rate fixed by them. The representative on behalf of respondent No,1 submitted that they were supplying the electricity to the Staff Colony at domestic rate but since audit has objected to it, therefore, they have stopped the billing on domestic rate, although each and every individual has separate meter installed by the Institute at their residence and they have also demanded the amount at bulk rate from the residents of the Staff Colony in excess of domestic rate. The respondent No,1 also admitted during arguments that they have referred the case to the WAPDA through the Governor Punjab to take over the electricity of the Institute and provide separate line for Staff Colony at domestic rate and for this purpose they have deposited Rs,1,06,58,644 for renovation of all electric lines and installation of new meters at each and every official quarter separately. He also placed a copy of the order of the Governor Punjab where it was observed that in order to replace the bulk supply at Ayub Agricultural Research Institute, Islamabad with individual meter system, in view of a similar facility provided by WAPDA to the Allied Hospital, Faisalabad and the same arrangement being requested will ensure better supply system for the laboratory section equipped with expensive research machines and also provided some measure of relief to the domestic consumers. The Punjab Government would be willing to pay for the change-over.
' The respondent No,1 also placed a document on record to show the bulk supply to the Allied Hospital facility which WAPDA had taken over in the recent past. There WAPDA agreed that bulk metering connection should be installed, at Medical College and Allied Hospital, separately ice, one for the Medical College and the other for the Hospital at C-2 Tariff and further explanation was given as regards electrification of residential Colony, separate individual meters, on domestic tariff, should be installed on cost deposit basis in each bungalow and quarter situated in the separate residential colony and this is necessary to resolve the conflict of disconnection of individual meters in case of non-payment. These separate meter connections will be provided at cost deposit basis chargeable from Punjab Government.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and their representative at length and have perused the record.
6. The learned Courts below have to keep in mind three factors, i,e, prima facie good case, balance of convenience or inconvenience and irreparable loss. Both the learned Courts below have not even applied their minds judiciously to all the above aspects of the case and held that the policy letter prima facie seems to be justified as the electricity is supplied to the Research Centre from a bulk feeder and the billing cannot be made under Tariff-C and rejected the interim injunction to the petitioner. The Civil Court being a Court of general jurisdiction enjoys the judicial power to strike down the actions of an Authority or Department which comes in conflict with the vested rights or the fundamental rights of the citizens or existing law. The Constitutionally granted fundamental rights are positive commitment towards the citizens which should be made real and meaningful by the Courts to enforce these vested rights. A perusal of Article 25 of the Constitution when interpreted would mean equality amongst different class and section of society. All the person - similarly situated must be treated alike and under Article 4 of the Constitution everybody is to be treated in accordance with law and when the State functionaries should act otherwise it is always the Court who redresses the grievance of an aggrieved person and provides remedies to the citizens and positively enforce fundamental rights of the ordinary citizens to lead a comfortable life.
The supply of electricity is also a vested right of an individual. Under Article 184(3) and Article 199(1)
(c) clauses (a) and (c) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the Constitution has given a power to the superior judiciary to enforce fundamental rights and can give a direction to the State functionaries in respect of any act in violation of the fundamental rights of a citizen.
Government of West Pakistan and another v. Begum Agha Karim Shorish Kashmiri PLD 1969 SC 14, Darshan Masih alias Rehmatey and others v. The State PLD 1990 SC 513. Mrs. Benazir Bhutto and another v. Federation of Pakistan and another PLD 1989 SC 66 and State of Punjab and others v.
Mohinder Singh Randhawa and another AIR 1992 SC 473. The collective effect of all the aforesaid judgments of the apex Court is that if the petitioner's claim rests upon Constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights the superior Court enjoys two-fold jurisdiction if the petitioner is aggrieved by an act of the State functionaries invading his fundamental rights and such action has no backing of law or taken under the law which is void in term of Article 8 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 can strike down that action and direct the State functionaries to redress the grievance of the person and also direct under Article 4 of the Constitution of Pakistan if the law is inconsistent with the fundamental rights. The law is to be treated void.
7. WAPDA has also made concession to recently taken over Allied Hospital and has agreed to give bulk metering connection to the Hospital separately and one for the Medical College and the other for Hospital, residential Colony at C-2 Tariff residential rate and it is surprising why the discrimination is made to the Staff Colony of Ayub Agricultural Research Institute where the present petitioner resides. It seems highly unjustified that the commercial rate of supply of electricity be obtained from the residents of Colony within the Research Centre. The Research Centre has projects, laboratories, offices, green houses, grown chambers, work-shops, and tube well, roads, street-lights. They also generate from the bulk supply but the plaintiffs in suit being residents of a Staff Colony do not generate income. They are the domestic residents and according to law they should be treated at par with the other residential colonies. Even the Governor Punjab has agreed that the expenses will be borne by the Government for installation of separate meters in the residential colonies. This shows prima facie good case and balance of convenience leaning towards the plaintiffs. The instant writ petition is accepted and the impugned orders dated 12-7- 2002 and 30-10-2002 passed respectively by the learned trial Court and the learned lower Appellate Court are hereby set aside. The respondents are restrained from charging rates and recovering from the petitioner the arrears calculated on the basis of new commercial rates. As far as the installation of independent meter at domestic rate under C-2 Tariff are concerned those are to be decided by the learned Courts below after the evidence is produced by the parties.