CWP-28500-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (127) CWP-28500-2026 Date of Decision: - 03.09.2026 M/s Rajdarbar Buildcon Private Limited ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA Present:- Mr. Amit Jhanji, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Abhijeet Singh Rawaley, Advocate, Ms. Eliza Gupta, Advocate, and Mr. Daksh Kadian, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the head note of the petition, the following prayers have been made:- “Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Memo No. 259415 dated 27.08.2026 (Annexure P-16) and Memo No. 259420 also dated 27.08.2026 (Annexure P-17) both issued by the Respondent No. 6, i.e. the Sub-Divisional Engineer, HSVP, Hisar having no jurisdiction to do so in light of Clauses 16 and 15 of the Water Supply Sanction Letters dated 21.01.2015 (Annexure P-3) and dated 03.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) when a dispute is pending before the NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28500-2026 -2- Superintending Engineer (Respondent No. 4), and for raising manifestly arbitrary and illegal demands on account of baseless and excessive water bills (of Rs. 82,13,625 and Rs. 2,77,30,036/-) raised against the Petitioner without proper verification of actual water consumption, meter readings and reconciliation of accounts being contrary to the procedure prescribed under the HSVP Water Regulations, 2001 (Annexure P- 18); AND With a further prayer that during the pendency of and subject to the outcome of the present Writ Petition, the operation and effect of the Impugned Memo No. 259415 dated 27.08.2026 (Annexure P-16) and Memo No. 259420 also dated 27.08.2026 (Annexure P-17) may kindly be stayed and that the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 may kindly be directed to ensure the provision of adequate and uninterrupted water supply to the Petitioner's Licensed Colony situated at Sector-24, Hisar and provisionally restore the Water Supply Connections bearing Numbers 98005090 and 14320119; AND For the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 to consider and decide the representations dated 07.03.2026 (Annexure P-6), 23.03.2026 (Annexure P-7) and 21.05.2026 (Annexure P-11) submitted by the Petitioner for enhancement of water supply to its Licensed Colony situated at Sector 24, Hisar in accordance with the law, and if required for the said purpose, also for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, especially a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 7 to consider enhancement of raw water supply from the Irrigation Department to HSVP in accordance with the law; AND/OR For the issuance of any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may kindly deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28500-2026 -3- on 25.11.2006, Licenses No.1284 to 1298 were issued in favour of the petitioner by the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana under the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and the petitioner had duly complied with all the development works. It is further submitted that the HSVP had sanctioned water connection on 21.01.2015 for the petitioner's licensed colony for supply of 200 KLD through its existing water supply line. It is stated that on 03.06.2025, the Executive Engineer, HSVP, Division No.1, Hisar was pleased to sanction another water supply connection in favour of the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner had been regularly paying the water bills but on 20.05.2026, an erroneous bill of Rs.35,00,000/- was issued which was found to be incorrect by the respondent-authorities. 3. It is submitted that on 27.08.2026, two bills/forwarding letters which have been annexed as Annexures P-16 and P-17 amounting to Rs.82,13,625/- and Rs.2,77,30,036/- were issued to the petitioner and that a perusal of the memos/forwarding letters which were served upon the petitioner along with the said bills would show that it was the own case of the respondent-authorities that in the site inspection on 25.05.2026, it was found that the water meter installed at site was not working. It is stated that once the water meter installed was not working, then, the bill in question (Annexure P-16) which is for the period from 06.05.2026 to 23.06.2026 could not have been made on the basis of actual consumption. It is argued that a perusal of the bill which is accompanied NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28500-2026 -4- with memo/forwarding letter (Annexure P-16) would show that in the bill it has been mentioned that the meter was working which is in contradiction with the averments made in the memo/forwarding letter. It is submitted that even with respect to memo which was submitted with the second bill, there were similar discrepancies and it was found that even the water meter installed on the basis of which the second bill has been generated was also not working. 4. It is argued that as per the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, more so, Regulation 20, in case there is a dispute regarding the correctness of the water charges bill by meter measurement, the consumer concerned, after depositing an amount equivalent to 10% of the disputed bill, can raise a dispute. It is submitted that the said dispute is to be resolved by the Superintending Engineer and the petitioner, in pursuance of the said regulation, has already made a complaint (Annexure P-15) to the Superintending Engineer, HSVP, Circle Hisar, Haryana. It is further submitted that no final decision on the same has been taken, whereas, during the pendency of the same, the respondent-authorities have disconnected the water connection. 5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to pay 10% of the disputed bills and has prayed that the water connection be restored as there are several residents living in the licensed colony and it would be very difficult for them to survive without water supply. It is further submitted that the Superintending NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28500-2026 -5- Engineer, HSVP, Circle Hisar, be directed to decide the said complaint/reference and in case deposit made by the petitioner is found to be in excess on final adjudication, then, the balance amount be returned to the petitioner. 6. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that in the present case, the bills in question are of a substantial amount and thus, the petitioner be directed to pay at least a minimum amount of Rs.50,00,000/- before their claim can be considered. 7. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, has submitted that the petitioner is ready to deposit the said amount of Rs.50,00,000/- with the respondent-authorities within a period of two weeks from today. 8. Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondent- authorities, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following observations/directions: - (i) Petitioner, as undertaken before this Court, would deposit an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- within a period of two weeks from today with the respondent No.4. (ii) Respondent No.4 is directed to decide the complaint (Annexure P-15), as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of two months by passing a speaking order. (iii) Respondent No.6 is directed to restore both the water NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28500-2026 -6- connections in question within a period of one day from the date the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.25,00,000/-. (vi) As undertaken before this Court, the petitioner would deposit the entire amount of Rs.50,00,000/- within a period of two weeks and in case the same is not done by the petitioner, then, the present writ petition would be deemed to have been dismissed. (v) In case, after final adjudication, it is found that the amount deposited by the petitioner is in excess, then, the respondent- authorities would return the excess amount to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE (DIVYA SHARMA) JUDGE September 03, 2026 naresh.k Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes Whether reportable? No NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.07 14:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document