Sushma Bhardwaj v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-7630-2026 Date of Decision: 13.03.2026 SUSHMA BHARDWAJ
...Petitioner
Vs.
DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Addl. A.G. Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short 'District Commission').
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner on being pointed out that impugned order is an appealable order submits that District Commission has passed order in compliance of directions of this Court and he was not party before this Court. The petitioner was neither party to agreement nor part of Residents Welfare Association.
3.
It is undisputed that impugned order was passed in the presence of petitioner and it was petitioner who approached District Commission.
DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.03.13 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-7630-2026 -24.
Maintainability of writ petition is one aspect and entertainability in view of availability of alternative remedy is another aspect. Considering the availability of remedy of first appeal before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and thereafter second appeal before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, this Court does not deem it appropriate to invoke its writ jurisdiction. 5.
Dismissed.
6.
It is made clear that the dismissal of petition would not inhibit the petitioner from availing any other alternative remedy. 7.
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE March 13, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.03.13 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document