CWP- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT 112 Avinash Chand Sharma Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present: SUVIR SEHGAL J. 1. in the nature of certiorari for quashing award dated 27.05.2025, Annexure P Services), Amritsar, (for short ‘PLAPUS filed under Section 22 seeking direction to replace old has been dismissed. 2. running a school category from the Punjab State Power Corporation he is regularly paying the consumption charges. Counsel states that -19091-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Avinash Chand Sharma Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ashvi Gulati, Advocate for Mr. Ferry Sofat, Advocate for the respondents. SUVIR SEHGAL J. Instant writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing award dated 27.05.2025, Annexure P-8, passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Util Services), Amritsar, (for short ‘PLAPUS filed under Section 22-C of the Legal Service Authorities Act, seeking direction to replace old, burnt and has been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is running a school with an electricity category from the Punjab State Power Corporation he is regularly paying the consumption charges. Counsel states that 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-19091-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 30.07.2025 … Petitioner Vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Advocate Ms. Ashvi Gulati, Advocate for Mr. Ferry Sofat, Advocate for the respondents. Instant writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing award dated 27.05.2025, 8, passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Amritsar, (for short ‘PLAPUS’), whereby an application C of the Legal Service Authorities Act, 1987 , burnt and dead stop electric meter, he petitioner states that the petitioner is ty connection under the NRS category from the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (PSPCL) and he is regularly paying the consumption charges. Counsel states that 1 Instant writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing award dated 27.05.2025, ity ), whereby an application 1987 , he petitioner states that the petitioner is the NRS (PSPCL) and he is regularly paying the consumption charges. Counsel states that Pooja Saini 2025.08.19 09:45 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment CWP- the electricity informing PSPCL, started and he did not pay them. Counsel states that due to the Covid education continue that the bill raised by the respondents without supplying any details, challenged by the petitioner before PLAPUS, erroneously rejected vide 3. became defective, it was duty of the PSPCL to replace it within a period of 5 days and He submits that PLAPUS has failed to demanded from the petitioner pertain was impo 4. submissio book. 5. electricity bills up to April, 2019 and has not made any paymen -19091-2025 (O&M) the electricity meter became defective in informing PSPCL, meter was not replaced. started getting bills on average basis, and he did not pay them. Counsel states that due to the Covid-19, a lockdown was imposed and the petitioner’s ducational institution also did not function continued to raise electricity bills on average basis that the bill dated 25.09.2020 for an amount of Rs.2,76,140/ raised by the respondents without supplying any details, challenged by the petitioner before PLAPUS, erroneously rejected vide impugned order Counsel asserts that once the became defective, it was duty of the PSPCL to replace it within a period of 5 days and petitioner could not be charged on average basis. He submits that PLAPUS has failed to demanded from the petitioner pertain was imposed and the petitioner is not liable to make the said I have heard counsel for the petitioner and considered his submission besides examining the documents appended with the paper The admitted case of the electricity bills up to April, 2019 and has not made any paymen 2 meter became defective in April, 2019 and despite meter was not replaced. In the meantime, petitioner which were on the higher side and he did not pay them. Counsel states that due to the outbreak of was imposed and the petitioner’s did not function, however, PSPCL on average basis. Counsel emphasis for an amount of Rs.2,76,140/- was raised by the respondents without supplying any details, which was challenged by the petitioner before PLAPUS, but the petition has been order, Annexure P-8. Counsel asserts that once the electricity meter installed became defective, it was duty of the PSPCL to replace it within a etitioner could not be charged on average basis. He submits that PLAPUS has failed to appreciate that charges being demanded from the petitioner pertain to the period when lockdown etitioner is not liable to make the said payment. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and considered his documents appended with the paper petitioner is that he has paid the electricity bills up to April, 2019 and has not made any payment for 2 2019 and despite In the meantime, petitioner which were on the higher side f was imposed and the petitioner’s r, PSPCL . Counsel emphasis was was but the petition has been lled became defective, it was duty of the PSPCL to replace it within a etitioner could not be charged on average basis. being down payment. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and considered his documents appended with the paper petitioner is that he has paid the for Pooja Saini 2025.08.19 09:45 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment CWP- the consumption charges thereafter. defective in for the basis. PSPCL has taken for an amount of Rs.3,33,260/ but petitioner school was the absence of any other means to determine the consumption of energy electricity bills on average basis The d explained by the PSPCL by stating that three phase electricity met was not available till December, 2020 pandemic the impugned consumed. T award passed by the PL 6. order as to costs. 30.07.2025 pooja saini -19091-2025 (O&M) the consumption charges thereafter. E defective in April, 2019 was replaced by PSPCL on 02.12.2020 and the intervening period, energy bill basis. PSPCL has taken a stand that a bill dated 05.12.2020 was issued for an amount of Rs.3,33,260/- on the petitioner failed to pay it. It is not the case of the school was lying closed and that he ha the absence of any other means to determine the consumption of energy from April, 2019 to December, 2020 electricity bills on average basis by PSPC The delay in the replacement of the electricity meter has been explained by the PSPCL by stating that three phase electricity met was not available till December, 2020 pandemic. Petitioner is a defaulter and cannot seek the setting aside of impugned bill, without depositing the charges for the consumed. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the award passed by the PLAPUS. Petition being bereft of merit is dismissed though with no order as to costs. .2025 pooja saini Whether Speaking/Reasoned Whether Reportable 3 Electricity meter, which became pril, 2019 was replaced by PSPCL on 02.12.2020 and energy bills have been raised on average bill dated 05.12.2020 was issued on the basis of the actual consumption, . It is not the case of the petitioner that his lying closed and that he had not consumed any energy. In the absence of any other means to determine the consumption of from April, 2019 to December, 2020, the charging of the PSPCL cannot be faulted with. of the electricity meter has been explained by the PSPCL by stating that three phase electricity meter was not available till December, 2020 due to the outbreak of the er and cannot seek the setting aside of ithout depositing the charges for the energy his Court does not find any reason to interfere with the of merit is dismissed though with no (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 3 which became pril, 2019 was replaced by PSPCL on 02.12.2020 and average bill dated 05.12.2020 was issued basis of the actual consumption, petitioner that his In the absence of any other means to determine the consumption of of the with. of the electricity meter has been r due to the outbreak of the er and cannot seek the setting aside of energy his Court does not find any reason to interfere with the of merit is dismissed though with no Pooja Saini 2025.08.19 09:45 I attest the integrity and accuracy of this order/judgment