CWP-23186-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (204) CWP-23186-2025 Date of decision:- 11.09.2025 Concord Hospitality Private Limited ... Petitioner Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Sukhandeep Singh, Advocate and Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Mr. Sangam Garg, Advocate and Ms. Anisha, Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of the respondents and have filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. On 11.08.2025, this Court passed the following order:- “Counsel for the petitioner has contended that although petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal under Section 127 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 (for short “the Act”) assailing final order of assessment dated 03.07.2025, Annexure P-10, but the impugned order has been passed in violation of Section 126(3) of the Act. It is his categoric case that neither the petitioner nor its counsel was ever heard and rather vide application dated 20.06.2025, Annexure P-8, petitioner's counsel appeared before the assessing authority, filed the vakalatnama and had requested for deferment. Issue notice of motion to the respondents. Mr. Sangam Garg, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents and has filed Memorandum of Appearance, which is taken on record. He requests for deferment to file reply. KAMAL SHARMA 2025.09.12 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh. CWP-23186-2025 -2- List on 11.09.2025. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned order, Annexure P-10, shall remain stayed till the next date. On the deferred date, respondents will produce the original record to show that the petitioner/its counsel were heard before passing the impugned order.” 3. Upon instructions received from Er. S.K.Sharma, Addl. S.E., Sub Urban, Amritsar, counsel for respondents states that the respondents are withdrawing the impugned order, Annexure P-10, and they shall pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner. 4. In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondents, writ petition is disposed of. 5. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to submit any additional documents/reply, he intends to rely upon in support of the submissions already made by him, when he is called upon for hearing by assessing authority. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE 11.09.2025 Kamal Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2025.09.12 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.