Rashpal Kaur Dehal v. Pspcl And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-16531-2022 Date of Decision : May 13, 2025 RASHPAL KAUR DEHAL -PETITIONER V/S PSPCL AND ORS.

-RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. R.K. Arya, Advocate for Mr. Sahil Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ferry Sofat, Advocate with Mr. Kartik Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Prashant Manchanda, Advocate for the respondent(s)-PSPCL.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

Through the instant writ petition, prayer is made for issuance of directions upon the respondents to remove the transformer carrying 33/66 KV of loads and High Voltage Over Headline wire carrying 11 KV from the petitioner's property situated at Village Barnala Kalan-1, Tehsil Nawanshahar, District S.B.S. Nagar.

2.

What emerges from perusal of the reply dated 12.05.2025, as furnished by the respondents before this Court, is that, the transformer and the higher-voltage overhead line in question were installed way back in the year 1977 and at that time, the said area was an open and undeveloped region with no defined plot boundaries. Furthermore, the lines were installed by the respondent(s) in exercise of its statutory powers under the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003.

3.

The reply further reveals that, the procedure for shifting of LT/HT lines and distribution transformer is enclosed in Regulation No.50 of the PSERC (Electricity Supply Code, Standards of Performance and Related DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.14 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-16531-2022 Matters) Regulations, 2024, read with Instruction No.40 of the Electricity Supply Instruction Manual, Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, Head Officer. However, the requisite procedure has never been adopted by the petitioner and she has never approached the respondent(s), under the apt provisions of law, for shifting of the transformer and the higher-voltage overhead line in question.

4.

This Court has considered the submissions of the parties. The factual submissions, as made by the respondents, are not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at this stage, the petitioner is ready and willing to, in accordance with the procedure embodied in the apposite Regulations and Instructions, approach the authority concerned by filing a representation and making payment of the requisite payments. However, he requests that, a direction be passed upon the authority/distribution licensee to take prompt decision on the petitioner's representation.

6.

The request made by the petitioner's counsel appears to be bona fide and innocuous. Therefore, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the authority/distribution licensee to, in case the petitioner moves the apposite representation by following the requisite procedure, make a final decision thereon within two months of its receipt. 7.

Disposed of accordingly.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) May 13, 2025 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.14 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment