SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED vs BHAJAN LAL S — 2026 PLD 37 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED VS BHAJAN LAL S. 20---Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act (XI of 2016), Ss. 3, 4 & 5---Civil dispute between Gas Company and consumer---Gas Utility Court---Jurisdiction---Scope---Gas Utility Court declined to adjudicate civil dispute under the Gas (Theft Control and Recovery) Act, 2016 ('the Act, 2016') and rejected plaints filed by Sui Southern Gas Company Limited (Gas Company/Appellants)---Argument of the consumers/respondents was that the Gas Utility Court(s) for adjudicating civil disputes under the Act, 2016 had not been notified vide Notification No. SO No. 293(1)/2017 dated 02.05.2017, ('the Notification')---Validity---Via the Notification, having been passed under S. 3 of the Act, 2016, the courts of certain District and Sessions Judges were notified as Gas Utility Courts to operate within defined territorial jurisdictions---Unfortunately, an ambiguity crept in due to the wording of the Notification as the same mentioned that the Courts so established will "exercise the powers for the trial of offences under the said Act..."; no mention was made explicitly for also adjudicating civil disputes falling within the purview of the Act, 2016; which was the basis for the consumers/respondents wrongly making their argument---The Notification mentions S. 3 of the Act, 2016 while S. 3 only provides for establishing an all-encompassing Gas Utility Court, which does not bifurcate between a civil or a criminal Gas Utility Court---Further, S. 4, which is the operative section to determine the jurisdiction of a Gas Utility Court, stipulates that the same "shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to all matters covered by this Act"---Hence, since the Act, 2016 does not create adivision between a Civil Gas Utility Court and a Criminal Gas Utility Court, delegated legislation. i.e., a notification, cannot create such a distinction for the same will be in contravention of S. 4 of the Act, 2016---Section 20 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, provides that "where by any Federal Act or Regulation, a power to issue any notification...is conferred...the expressions used in the notification...if it is made after the commencement of this Act, shall unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, have the same respective meanings as in the Act or Regulation conferring the power"---Even otherwise, it is settled law that delegated legislation cannot contradict the principal statute---And in case of any contravention, the courts shall make all efforts to reconcile the inconsistency---Thus, the Gas Utility Courts established under the Notification hold the jurisdiction to adjudicate civil and criminal matters per the mandate of Ss. 3, 4 & 5 of the Act, 2016---Appellate/High Court set-aside the impugned order directing the Gas Utility Courts to proceed with adjudicating civil cases under the Act, 2016 and ensuing Notification---Appeal, filed by Gas Company, was allowed accordingly.

SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED vs BHAJAN LAL S — 2026 PLD 37 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD