KARACHI: The Sindh High Court on Tuesday issued a notice to Mayor Murtaza Wahab on a contempt of court application against him for not implementing an earlier court order about collection of the controversial Municipal Utility Charges and Taxes (MUCT) through electricity bills.

A two-judge bench comprising Justice Arshad Hussain Khan and Justice Sana Akram Minhas asked the mayor to file his reply till Aug 7.

The contempt application was moved on behalf of some Jamaat-i-Islami leaders, who initially petitioned the SHC in 2022 against the provincial government’s move to outsource the MUCT collection to the K-Electric.

Citing the Karachi mayor as an alleged contemnor, the applicants submitted that the SHC had disposed of their petition as well as two other identical pleas on May 29, directing the Karachi Metropolitan Corporation to complete the exercise of reviewing the impugned agreement with the KE and placing the same before the City Council within three months.

JI leaders move court against City Council’s approval accorded to collection of MUCT via KE bills without following May 29 order

They submitted that Mayor Wahab had also filed an undertaking before the SHC to review the agreement to ensure that only service charges were directly deductible by the power utility and no other deduction must be made directly. He had also given an undertaken that a special committee of council members to be constituted to deliberate on the subject issue as well as its approval from the City Council.

They further submitted that the alleged contemnor also undertook that the KMC would examine the number of units in the electricity bills and would extend some relief to the common man who could not afford more financial burden.

Thereafter, the applicants stated that the metropolitan commissioner of the KMC had issued a notification on May 31 about constitution of an eight-member committee, headed by Mayor Wahab. They said a meeting was called on June 3, but an issue was raised on the inclusion of two members of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf who both were shown as the parliamentary party leaders of the PTI.

They submitted that Leader of the Opposition in the City Council Advocate Saifuddin, one of the applicants, tried to resolve the issue and contacted the parliamentary party leader of the PPP on June 2, who admitted the mistake and assured that the meeting would be held on June 4, after addressing the issue.

However, they informed the SHC that despite the assurance, the alleged contemnor held the meeting on the same day without any information and only the ruling party and their allies attended it.

They said that no deliberations were held with the opposition as the JI and PTI were neither informed about the meeting nor they were taken into confidence.

The applicants said that on June 10, a meeting of the City Council was called but the issue of MUCT was not included in its agenda. However, a resolution on the issue was added through the supplementary agenda but no agreement was presented before the council.

They contended that the alleged contemnor, who was chairing the council meeting, hastily placed the resolution before the council for approval of the MUCT. This act resulted in chaos and disturbance and as such no counting of members in support or against of the resolution took place, but the mayor arbitrarily announced approval of the same by majority vote.

Representing the applicants, Advocate Usman Farooq argued that all such acts were illegal and in clear defiance of the undertaking given by the mayor before the SHC as well as the judgement.

He stated that neither the rates were revised nor any agreement /amended agreement placed before the City Council.

The counsel contended that the alleged contemnor had deliberately undermined/defied the May 29 judgement of the SHC and asked the court to prosecute him for contempt of the court.

Earlier on May 29, the SHC had decided three identical petitions and adjourned till the second week of August hearing on a fourth connected petition that impugned the validity (vires) of the rules promulgated by the local government.

However, the SHC had not extended its ad-interim injunction, passed in 2022 restraining the power utility from collecting MUCT through electricity bills, but ruled that the juridical scrutiny and contractual dynamics between KMC and KE were under judicial review by the SHC in the fourth petition.

Published in Dawn, July 24th, 2024