1. Deferred.
2. Granted, but subject to all just exceptions.
3. The petitioner through this petition sought relief that the Site Inspection Reports (SIR) bearing Nos. 0008964 and 0008965 both dated 10-2-2001, conducted by respondents, are false, fabricated and of no legal consequence.
' Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is a limited company, carrying on business of display and sale of marble sheets and tiles of various sizes on Plot No,1-C/51, Block 5, Qasba, Metrovill, Karachi.
In the memo. Of petition, the petitioner alleged that the petitioner is carrying on only sale and display in daytime and that too in an open area surrounded by a boundary wall and, therefore, neither electricity power meter is required nor the same is provided at the premises. It is alleged that the respondent No,1 through respondent No,2 has lodged an F.I.R. Bearing No,26 of 2001 dated 10-2-2001, wherein it has been shown that the officials of Karachi Electric Supply Corporation
(KESC) along with B Army Monitoring Team and Deputy Assistant Electric Inspector, who misbehaviourly impersonated himself as EIK, i,e, Electric Inspector, Karachi, raided the place of the petitioner and found that the theft of electricity was occurring by dodging electricity Meter Nos.BL- 1175 and BL-1178. In the said F.I.R. Name of occupant of the plot in question has been shown as Hanifa Suleman of Messrs International Marble Factory, which factory as per petitioner does not exist on the plot in question. The petitioner, on coming to know the above fact, approached respondent No,1 and inquired about the alleged raid and also requested to clarify the position of the petitioner as well as of the F.I.R. As incorrect allegations contained in the said F.I.R. Are defaming the petitioner and thereby tarnishing the petitioner's reputation and goodwill in business circles, besides friends, family and relations, and are also lowering the respect of the petitioner as well as the related persons. It is also alleged in the petition that on the petitioner's protest, the respondent No,l's officials, to justify their act of lodging F.I.R., handed over copies of two S.1.Rs in respect of the two referred meters to the petitioner, which are self-explanatory. It is further alleged in the memo.
Of petition that the respondent No, l's official refused to honour their promise by rectifying the contents of F.I.R. Or to clarify the position of the petitioner as also of the petitioner's plot on the pretext that since the F.I.R. Has been submitted before the Special Magistrate (KESC), therefore, any amendment or alteration will counterblast to their case and some officials may face serious departmental action. It is also alleged that the KESC officials undertook to issue a certificate clarifying thereby, no involvement of the petitioner or its plot. We have heard Mr. Munib Ahmed Khan, learned Advocate for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended before us that the F.I.R. Has been registered against the petitioner without any justification and relied upon Column 4 of the F.I.R., wherein against the place of occurrence name of Messrs Suleman International Marble Factory, situated on the plot in question has been shown. The learned counsel further argued that the petitioner has nothing to do with the said company Messrs Sulernan International Marble Factory nor such company ever existed on the plot in question. The learned counsel next argued that wrong facts have been mentioned in the F.I.R. And no notice was issued to the petitioner prior to' registration of the F.I.R. In question. He relied upon section 20 of the Electricity Act, which provides prior notice before any action is taken. We have gone through the contents of memo. Of petition, documents filed alongwith it and also taken into consideration arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. From the perusal of the F.I.R. It appears that senior officers of the respondents alongwith Army, Monitoring Team were busy in connection with the suppression of the theft of electricity, when at 04-00 hours they reached at plot in question where Messrs Suleman International Marble Factory was situated and on checking the said factory two meters of KESC, bearing Nos. BL -1178, showng reading 016813X10 and. BL-1175 showing reading 019427X10 were found installed which were closed.
The respondent also noted that from Meter BL-1178, the supplied underground cable-2 of KESC was of 70 mm and for other Meter No,BL-1175, the underground cable-2 supplied by KESC was 35 mm, which were cut off before the meter and a direct cable of 70 mm was connected through electromagnetic contactor, through with both the electric magnetic, a small switch with on/off was fixed. After making thorough inquiry abut the connection load, etc, the same were taken in possession in presence of the owner of the factory Mr. Nauman Baqui son of Abdul Baqui, owner of the factory, and the electrician of the factory, namely, Abid Ali son of Phool Muhammad were arrested. The petitioner's grievance in the' petition is that no factory by the name of Messrs Suleman International Marble Factory ever existed on the plot in question and the present F.I.R.
Shows wrong address and involves the plot where the petitioner is carrying on business.
We are afraid that in exercise of writ jurisdiction we cannot investigate these disputed questions of fact that whether Messrs Suleman International Marble Factory was in existence on the plot in question at the time when raid was conducted or not. Before us the petitioner has not produced any single document to establish that the petitioner ' is in possession of the premises, bearing Plot No,1-C/51, Block 5, Qasba, Metrovill, Karachi. Even in the certificate of incorporation annexed with the plaint no address of the petitioner has been mentioned. The matter is already before competent authority for adjudication where petitioner can approach and establish that the petitioner's property in question is not involved in any manner and further that Messrs Suleman International Marble Factory was never existed on the plot in question and or that the petitioner is in no manner associated with the said company..