LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Thursday issued nodces to the federal government and the distribution companies (Discos) on a petition challenging unannounced power outages in Punjab province especially.

Justice Shahid Karim was hearing a public interest petition filed by Judicial Activism Panel (JAP).

JAP`s counsel Azhar Siddique argued before the court that the unannounced loadshedding had paralysed the lives of the citizens.

He said the Discos had f ailed to discharge their duties.

He pointed out that the govern-ment did not purchase fuel in time that resulted in low production of electricity. He urged the court to take notice of the situation and the misery of the people and direct the government to end loadshedding.

Justice Karim asked the lawyer as if he represented the opposition.

Advocate Siddique said he initiated public interest litigation as the courts also encouraged this to protect fundamental rights of the citizens.

The judge observed that the courts lack jurisdiction to issue an order in such cases that purely fell in the executive domain.

However, the judge issued notices on the petition and directed a lawof ficer to submit replies on behalf of the respondents within a week.

Justice Karim also sought replies from the Punjab government on a separate petition of the JAP against price hike of essential commodities.

The lawyer contended that the inflation was also a matter of fundamental rights of the citizens.

Asked whether the court could fix prices of the commodities, he said the issue pertained to mismanagement and lack of a mechanism to control prices.

The judge adjourned hearing for a week.

NEPRA: The Lahore High Court has suspended a notice of the NationalElectricPowerRegulatoryAuthority (Nepra) issued to an independent power producer (IPP) for adjustment of calorific value.

Justice Shahid Karim passed the stay order on a petition of Nishat Power Limited heard on June 6.

On behalf of the IPP, Advocate Salman Aslam Butt argued that the nodce had been issued under suo motu power purportedly conferred on the Nepra.

He further argued that component of tarif f sought to be reviewed had already been determined by the regulator through a notincation issued in February 2016. He said it was a final determination regarding strength of fuel and which was done on the basis of review filed by the petitioner.