|Related Links:||Articles on GPL|
|Letters Menu||Archival Menu|
Gaskin, seeking to prevent the tariffs hike from being implemented, has been granted a nisi order prohibiting the implementation.
But Senior Counsel Rex McKay, for the defendant utility, submitted to Justice Jainarayan Singh, at the Thursday hearing, that Gaskin is a “notable busy body” who has no locus standi (status) to file the action.
McKay, who is associated with other Senior Counsel Miles Fitzpatrick, said GPL was acting within the law to raise and reduce charges and calculate the percentages.
McKay said actions based on prerogative writs could only be applied if there is a breach of statutory rules and there is none in this case.
According to him, only the Prime Minister can make an application to vary the statutory regulations.
Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan, for Gaskin, refuted the description of him as a busy body and said that, as a consumer who will be negatively affected by the higher tariffs, the latter is competent to execute the proceedings, because of his tremendously wide knowledge of the issues, which makes him, comparatively, an expert.
Ramjattan maintained that, once a consumer is affected by the GPL decision and the individual has peculiar knowledge of the matters involved, he is one to regarded with legal standing to launch the proceedings.
Ramjattan also argued that GPL, whether a public body or not, is subjected to judicial review and anything it decides can be scrutinised by the Courts to determine if it is reasonable, legal and proper.
GPL had published notices of intention to, from last February 1, levy 13.9 per cent more on residential consumers and 16.6 per cent on commercial and industrial consumers but another judge issued the edict that prevented GPL receiving the additional revenue pending determination of the current case which continues next Tuesday afternoon.