PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD AND ORS v. RINKU SINGH AND ANR
CWP/3334/2023 · 2025-09-25
Suvir Sehgal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22209 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22209 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CWP-3334-2023 -1- 107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3334-2023 Date of decision:-25.09.2025 Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others ...Petitioners Versus Rinku Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present : Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Deepika, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) for respondent No.1. Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J.(ORAL)
1. A short issue that arises for determination in this writ petition is as to whether the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) can interfere in a matter where the petitioner i.e. the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. has issued notices under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short - ‘the Electricity Act’) alleging theft of electricity. This issue stands settled by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court BRIJ MOHAN 2025.09.26 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh
CWP-3334-2023 -2- 107 in Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Anr. Versus Permanent Lok Adalat, Public Utility Services, Gurgaon & Anr., 2016 (2) PLR 634. This Court has specifically held that in cases of theft of electricity, assessment has to be made under Section 154(5) of the Electricity Act and the Special Court established under Section 153(1) of the Electricity Act has been conferred with the jurisdiction to challenge the proceedings.
2. In view thereof, impugned award passed by PLA, PUS is set aside.
3. During the pendency of the instant petition, respondent No.1 has deposited the entire amount demanded vide impugned notice dated 30.03.2021, Annexure P7. Xerox copies of some of the receipts have been placed on record by counsel for respondent No.1 on the previous date of hearing. Counsel for the petitioners has confirmed that the entire assessed amount of Rs.2,43,510/- has been deposited.
4. In view of the above development, writ petition is disposed of.
(SUVIR SEHGAL) 25.09.2025
JUDGE Brij Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No BRIJ MOHAN 2025.09.26 17:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh