• Revised tariff Rs7.60 lower than original Rs39.97 determination
• KE says revised MYT financially unsustainable, may pursue legal remedies
• Consumers will continue to pay uniform tariff applicable to other Discos

ISLAMABAD: The National Electric Power Reg­ulatory Authority (Nepra) on Wednesday notified K-Electric’s average base tariff at Rs32.37 per unit under its seven-year multiyear tariff (MYT) regime for FY24 to FY30, effectively reducing the government’s subsidy burden by almost Rs200 billion.

Nepra had originally determined KE’s multiyear tariff at Rs39.97 per unit for the period but revised it down by Rs7.60 per unit, or 19pc, to Rs32.37 in October last year on review petitions filed by the power division, Jamaat-i-Islami, Karachi-based industrialists and KE management on different grounds.

The Rs32.37 base tariff for FY24 will be indexed to inflation and exchange-rate variations for the subsequent six years through FY30.

Informed sources said the revised determination reduced KE’s effective rate of return to around 13-14pc from 22-23pc under the previous determination and cut subsidy payables by the government to K-Electric by around Rs200bn over the seven-year period.

K-Electric had challenged Nepra’s revised MYT determination in the Sindh High Court and secured a stay against its implementation. The court later referred the matter to Nepra’s Appellate Tribunal, being the appropriate forum under the law.

A three-member tribunal on Wedn­esday upheld Nepra’s revised determination and rejected KE’s position.

Nepra subsequently issued four interrelated gazette notifications and clarified that KE consumers would not be charged the tariff determined by the regulator. Instead, they would continue to be cha­rged the uniform tariff applicable to consumers of other distribution companies, in line with the federal government’s policy guidelines of Aug 22, 2023, under the National Electricity Policy, 2021.

The matter has now attained finality through the gazette notifications unless stayed or overturned by a higher legal forum, i.e. a high court, the Federal Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court of Pakistan as the case may be.

A KE spokesperson indicated that the company could challenge the decision, saying the revised tariff was not financially sustainable.

“In pursuance of the order of the Nepra Appellate Tribunal in the matter of appeals filed by K-Electric against Nepra’s decisions dated Oct 20, 2025, today a verbal order was announced where it was informed that K-Electric’s appeals have been dismissed. However, the written order is yet to be issued by the tribunal,” the spokesperson said.

“This development has a substantial adverse impact on K-Electric’s Multi-Year Tariff for the control period FY2024 to FY2030 and is therefore not considered financially sustainable for the company,” the spokesperson added.

KE said it would consider all legal remedies available to it after receiving the tribunal’s detailed order.

The government had earlier challenged Nepra’s original Rs39.97 per unit base tariff, which was indexed to inflation and the exchange rate, arguing that it gave KE an undue benefit of almost Rs750bn over the seven-year control period at the expense of the national exchequer, consumers across the country and taxpayers.

It had cited higher allowances for law and order, losses and fuel price adjustments, among other factors, compared to other distribution companies.

Nepra had rejected some review petitions on technical grounds, including limitation and locus standi, but accepted several substantive points under its regulatory mandate to ensure legality, regulatory coherence and protection of public interest.

The regulator said precedents showed that, where public interest warranted, it could revisit its own determinations despite procedural defects in applications filed by parties.

It said previous determinations had recognised and exercised powers of self-review under the Nepra Act, Tariff Rules and Review Regulations to correct material errors and align outcomes with sector realities. “These decisions confirm that the authority’s power to review and correct its determinations in the interest of justice is not extinguished by procedural infirmities in the initiating pleadings”, it said.

Published in Dawn, September 24th, 2026