LHC Restrains LESCO From Disconnecting Residential Power Supply Over Industrial Dues
LAHORE, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 24th Aug, 2026) The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday restrained the Lahore Electric Supply Company (LESCO) from taking coercive action against a consumer’s residential electricity connection over disputed dues allegedly payable by a separate industrial concern.
Background
The court issued this direction while disposing of a Writ Petition filed by Ghazi Khan, brother of Special Assistant to Prime Minister for Industries and Production, Haroon Akhtar Khan. The court directed the competent LESCO authority to treat the petition as a representation and decide the matter within two weeks, after providing an opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
Petitioner's Argument
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that his client’s residential electricity connection was separate, independently metered, and fully paid. He claimed that the liability in question pertained exclusively to the industrial connection of M/s Superior Textile Mills Limited and could not be legally recovered by threatening disconnection of an entirely separate domestic connection.
The counsel emphasized:
- The residential connection had its own unique reference number, meter, billing record, and payment history.
- No outstanding liability had been established against the petitioner for the domestic connection.
- Section 24(1) of the Electricity Act, 1910, did not authorize LESCO to use one consumer’s residential connection to recover dues allegedly owed by another consumer or related to separate premises.
- Issuance of the prescribed notice and adherence to due process were mandatory before disconnection.
Legal Rulings Invoked
The counsel cited several judgments, including Kohinoor (Gujjar Khan) Mills Ltd. v. Islamabad Electric Supply Co., where it was held that electricity supply to separate premises could not be discontinued merely because the same person happened to be a director. He also relied on judgments stating that a consumer could not be condemned unheard and that disconnection without prior notice and due process was unlawful.
Constitutional Concerns
The petitioner’s counsel alleged that the industrial liability itself was disputed and pending before a competent forum. Therefore, he argued, it could not be treated as an admitted or finally recoverable liability to justify coercive action against the petitioner’s residential connection. He further invoked Articles 4, 9, and 10-A of the Constitution, arguing that electricity constituted a basic necessity of life and that arbitrary disconnection would violate fundamental rights.
He cited Supreme Court and Lahore High Court precedents recognizing access to electricity as connected with the constitutional right to life.
Conclusion
After hearing these arguments, the court remitted the petition and its annexures to Respondent No.