MEPCO is seeking a law firm, association of persons, or partnership to provide legal services on a retainer basis, and the procurement is broader than a routine request for legal representation.
The Multan Electric Power Company Limited has issued procurement reference 112/27 for the engagement of a law firm or legal partnership. The assignment covers corporate, commercial, regulatory, contractual, operational, administrative, labour, dispute, and litigation-related matters. The procurement is being handled through EPADS v2.0 under a Single Stage-Two Envelope procedure using Quality and Cost Based Selection.
There is also a useful detail that prospective firms should not miss. The original submission date was changed through Corrigendum No. 1. The revised bidding document gives September 14, 2026, at 11:00 AM as the proposal submission deadline, with proposals scheduled to open at 11:30 AM the same day.
For readers who regularly follow MEPCO developments through mepccobill.pk, this is worth watching because legal procurement affects much more than court cases. It touches the contracts, regulatory obligations, procurement work, employment matters, and day-to-day decisions behind a large electricity distribution organization.
1. What MEPCO Is Actually Looking For
The wording of the procurement makes one thing clear: MEPCO is not simply looking for a lawyer to appear in court when a dispute arises.
The selected firm will provide comprehensive legal advisory and support services. The terms of reference specifically include corporate, commercial, constitutional, regulatory, contractual, operational, administrative, and labour matters. The work also extends to disputes, claims, notices, litigation, arbitration, and other legal proceedings involving MEPCO.
That broad scope makes sense for a power distribution company. A utility organization deals with contracts, employees, suppliers, regulators, consumers, infrastructure projects, procurement procedures and disputes at the same time.
The legal team therefore needs to understand the environment in which MEPCO operates rather than treating every issue as a separate courtroom assignment.
The RFP also specifically asks the selected firm to provide written and oral legal opinions. It can also be required to draft, vet, or review contracts, agreements, memorandums of understanding, undertakings, legal notices, correspondence, policies, standard operating procedures and other documents.
For someone assessing this opportunity, that distinction matters. A firm with strong litigation experience but limited experience in regulatory, corporate and energy-sector work would not necessarily be the strongest fit.
2. The Revised MEPCO Law Firm Deadline
The deadline is one of the easiest details to get wrong because an earlier version of the notice showed August 28, 2026.
A corrigendum was issued on August 28, and the revised EPADS bidding document now states that the RFP must be submitted through EPADS v2.0 by Monday, September 14, 2026, at 11:00 AM. The proposals are scheduled to be opened at 11:30 AM on September 14.
Here is the current schedule in a simple format:
| Procurement detail | Current information |
|---|---|
| EOI / RFP reference | 112/27 |
| EPADS procurement reference | P85141 |
| Procurement type | Consultancy Services |
| Procedure | Single Stage-Two Envelope |
| Selection method | Quality and Cost Based Selection |
| Submission platform | EPADS v2.0 |
| Revised submission deadline | September 14, 2026, 11:00 AM |
| Proposal opening | September 14, 2026, 11:30 AM |
| Contract period | Two years |
| Possible extension | One additional year |
| Bid security | Call at Deposit or Bank Guarantee, as specified |
The revised bidding document should take priority over older copies when a date differs. That is particularly important for procurement notices because an old newspaper notice or a copied tender listing can remain online after a corrigendum has changed the schedule.
And this is where people usually go wrong: they see the August 28 date in an older announcement and assume the opportunity has already closed. The current corrigendum and RFP show otherwise.
3. Who Is Eligible to Participate?
MEPCO has set several mandatory requirements for participating firms.
The bidding document requires a law firm, association of persons, or partnership profile showing the team members who will be involved in providing legal services. The proposed Lead Counsel must have a valid licence to practice before the Supreme Court of Pakistan and at least 15 years of professional experience since enrolment as a lawyer. Detailed CVs are also required.
There are other documentary requirements too.
The firm must provide the required undertakings concerning its legal and financial standing, confidentiality and conflict of interest. It must also demonstrate relevant expertise involving the power sector, state-owned enterprises, public-sector and private-sector work. Active Taxpayer status with FBR for Income Tax and Sales Tax is also listed as a requirement.
A quick checklist looks like this:
- Law firm, association of persons, or partnership profile
- Details of the proposed legal team
- Valid Supreme Court licence for the Lead Counsel
- At least 15 years of professional experience for the Lead Counsel
- Detailed CVs
- Required undertakings on stamp paper
- Confidentiality and conflict-of-interest undertaking
- Evidence of relevant sector experience
- Active Taxpayer status with FBR
- Complete EOI/RFP documentation
- Required bid security
The document also states that failure to meet a mandatory requirement can result in disqualification.
That is why preparing the proposal should not be treated as simply sending a company profile and a fee quotation.
4. Experience in the Power Sector Carries Real Weight
The evaluation system gives considerable attention to relevant experience.
The technical evaluation carries 60 percent of the overall weighting, while the financial evaluation carries 40 percent. A minimum technical passing score of 60 marks is specified.
The technical assessment considers several areas.
Team size accounts for 15 marks. Relevant experience of the Lead Counsel accounts for another 15 marks. Experience involving power, energy, the public sector and state-owned enterprises carries 25 marks, making it one of the largest individual components.
Private-sector legal consultancy experience carries 20 marks, while regulatory compliance and dispute-resolution expertise carries another 20 marks. The remaining 5 marks concern the firm’s proposed presentation and methodology.
This produces an interesting picture of what MEPCO wants.
The strongest proposal is not necessarily the firm with the cheapest financial offer. Under QCBS, technical quality matters substantially before financial scoring is combined with it.
The evaluation document specifically asks for evidence of legal opinions, advisory or consultancy assignments, and drafting or vetting of contracts and legal documents for power and energy entities, including examples involving DISCOs, GENCOs, NTDC and NEPRA matters.
That makes previous energy-sector work particularly relevant.
A firm preparing its proposal should therefore make its relevant assignments easy to verify. Listing twenty old cases without explaining the firm’s role is less useful than presenting clear evidence of what type of legal problem was handled and what responsibility the proposed team actually had.
5. The Work Goes Beyond Courtrooms
The Terms of Reference provide a good indication of the day-to-day nature of the assignment.
MEPCO wants advice on applicable laws, rules, regulations, notifications, policies and regulatory instruments. The selected firm will also be involved in reviewing contracts and other documents and advising on legal safeguards and risk mitigation.
Regulatory compliance is another major component.
The RFP refers to the Companies Act, 2017, the State-Owned Enterprises (Governance and Operations) Act, 2023, applicable labour laws, PPRA Rules and the regulatory framework of NEPRA.
For a company operating a large electricity distribution network, these areas overlap constantly.
A procurement contract might create a commercial question. An employment dispute might involve labour law. A regulatory matter might affect operations. A disagreement with a contractor could develop into arbitration or litigation. Good legal advice needs to recognize those connections rather than treating each file in isolation.
The contract also expects responsiveness. Standard written legal opinions should preferably be supplied within seven working days after complete instructions and relevant documents are received. Matters specifically marked urgent should preferably be addressed within three working days. For complex matters requiring more time, the firm is expected to inform MEPCO of the reason and expected submission date.
That requirement tells prospective bidders something useful about the nature of the relationship. MEPCO is looking for continuing legal support, not occasional assistance.
6. Confidentiality and Conflicts Are Not Side Issues
Legal work involving a large public-sector organization naturally involves sensitive information.
The Terms of Reference require the selected firm to maintain strict confidentiality regarding information, records and documents received from or relating to MEPCO. The firm also cannot represent or advise another person, company or entity against MEPCO where that engagement creates an actual or potential conflict of interest. Any actual or potential conflict must be disclosed to MEPCO immediately.
This is one area where a proposal needs more than a sentence saying that the firm values confidentiality.
A serious conflict-checking process should be clear internally before the engagement begins. The same applies to document handling, access to case information and communication between different members of the legal team.
The RFP also states that legal opinions, drafts, reports, reviews, notes and other work specifically prepared for MEPCO under the engagement remain the exclusive property of MEPCO and must be handed over when requested.
Those provisions are easy to overlook while focusing on experience scores and financial figures, but they define how the professional relationship is expected to work.
7. How the Procurement Will Be Evaluated
The selection process uses Quality and Cost Based Selection.
The technical side accounts for 60 percent and the financial side 40 percent. The technical proposal is therefore not simply a qualification formality. Firms need to demonstrate enough relevant experience to reach the required technical threshold before the financial side becomes meaningful.
The technical scoring can be viewed like this:
| Evaluation area | Maximum marks |
|---|---|
| Number of team members | 15 |
| Lead Counsel experience | 15 |
| Power, energy, public sector and SOE experience | 25 |
| Private-sector legal consultancy experience | 20 |
| Regulatory compliance and dispute resolution | 20 |
| Presentation and methodology | 5 |
| Total | 100 |
The bidding document states that the technical passing score is 60 marks. Experience in power, energy and public-sector or SOE assignments receives 25 marks, while regulatory compliance and dispute resolution receives 20.
So a proposal should be built around evidence.
The firm’s profile matters, but the CVs, engagement evidence, relevant assignments and proposed methodology matter too. MEPCO specifically asks for proof where available, including experience certificates and engagement letters for relevant areas.
8. Contract Length and Retainer Arrangement
The procurement is for a retainer-based engagement.
The bidding document specifies a contract period of two years, with a possible extension of one year. The extension is subject to mutual written consent, approval of the competent authority and compliance with applicable procurement laws.
The contract documentation also describes a monthly retainer arrangement for routine advisory and consultancy services.
Extraordinary litigation, arbitration, Supreme Court appearances or specialized assignments outside the ordinary scope may be compensated separately under the contractual provisions.
This distinction matters for firms calculating their financial proposal. Routine advisory work and exceptional litigation work are not necessarily treated in exactly the same way.
The procurement document lists bid security requirements as well, including Call at Deposit or Bank Guarantee in the specified form. The revised RFP states that proposals must be submitted through EPADS v2.0, while the required hard copy of the bid security is to be submitted to the specified MEPCO office.
9. Where to Check the Official Procurement Information
The safest source for firms considering this opportunity is the current EPADS record and the latest bidding document rather than an older copied notice.
The EPADS procurement reference is P85141, while the procurement itself is identified as 112/27. The current RFP is issued under MEPCO and contains the corrigendum that moved the deadline to September 14, 2026.
For general MEPCO consumers, the legal procurement is a different matter from everyday billing. If you are checking your own electricity information, the MEPCO Bill Check service on mepccobill.pk provides access to bill-related information, while the site’s MEPCO Bill Payment Methods can help with payment options. The site’s MEPCO Distribution Areas guide also explains the company’s service coverage.
The MEPCO Detection Bill guide is useful for a different type of legal and billing concern, particularly when a consumer is trying to understand inspection-related charges.
The important point is to use the right source for the right purpose. A consumer looking for a bill should not rely on a procurement notice, and a law firm preparing a bid should not rely on an old article when an updated EPADS document is available.
10. What Interested Law Firms Should Double-Check
Before submitting a proposal, a participating firm should compare its documents against every mandatory requirement in the current RFP.
The Lead Counsel’s Supreme Court licence and professional experience should be clearly documented. Team CVs should match the people actually proposed for the assignment. Relevant power-sector and regulatory assignments should be supported by evidence where required.
The firm should also check its FBR taxpayer status and prepare the required undertakings. The bid security needs to follow the form specified in the procurement documents.
Most importantly, the proposal should be submitted through EPADS v2.0 within the revised deadline. The current document specifically states that bids not submitted through EPADS v2.0 will be disqualified.
There is no benefit in leaving these checks until the final hour. A technical deficiency that looks minor internally can become a mandatory compliance problem during procurement evaluation.
MEPCO’s own RFP says material deficiencies in the requested information can lead to rejection of a proposal.
That is probably the most practical lesson from the entire notice: read the current bidding document, not just the headline.
FAQs
What is MEPCO’s law firm procurement reference?
The procurement is identified as 112/27, with EPADS procurement reference P85141. It concerns engagement of a law firm, association of persons, or partnership on a retainer basis.
What is the revised deadline for the MEPCO law firm RFP?
The current corrigendum and revised RFP state that proposals must be submitted through EPADS v2.0 by September 14, 2026, at 11:00 AM. The proposals are scheduled to open at 11:30 AM that day.
What qualifications does the Lead Counsel need?
The Lead Counsel must have a valid licence to practice before the Supreme Court of Pakistan and at least 15 years of professional experience since enrolment as a lawyer.
Does MEPCO require power-sector experience?
Yes. The technical evaluation specifically awards marks for experience involving power, energy, public-sector organizations and state-owned enterprises. Evidence involving areas such as DISCOs, GENCOs, NTDC and NEPRA matters is specifically mentioned.
How long is the proposed contract?
The contract is specified for two years, with a possible one-year extension subject to the conditions stated in the agreement and applicable procurement requirements.
Is the lowest financial bid automatically selected?
No. The procurement uses Quality and Cost Based Selection. Technical evaluation carries 60 percent of the overall weighting and financial evaluation carries 40 percent.
For the latest procurement record and bidding documents, the official EPADS listing is the reference I would use rather than relying on older copies of the advertisement.
