Sandeep Kansal v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited Nad ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 06.08.2022 Sandeep Kansal ......Petitioner Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present: Ms. Aayna, Advocate for Mr. Arpandeep Narula, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Samridhi Sareen, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of prohibition restraining respondents No.1 to 3 not to disconnect the electricity connection bearing No.3007464675, which is in the name of the petitioner without following due process of law. Notice of motion was issued on 05.08.2022 to the following effect:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit for permanent injunction at the instance of

 the petitioner is pending in the Civil Court where respondent No.1-Corporation is not a party. There is a contested civil litigation pending between the parties arising out of joint land and partition thereof. Petitioner is an occupier of the premises in question where electricity connection bearing No.3007464675 is in existence. The aforesaid electricity connection sought to be disconnected by respondent No.1 on the asking of respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

Notice of motion for 06.08.2022.

On the asking of the Court, Ms. Samridhi Sareen, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-Corporation and seeks a day's time to have further instructions."

Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 submits that the apprehension of the petitioner is ill founded. There is no such contemplation to disconnect the electricity connection of the petitioner in any manner. Only a notice was issued to the petitioner on 11.07.2022, requiring the petitioner to explain his position in respect of meter in question. The said letter was issued on the representation filed by respondent No.4. In pursuance of the aforesaid letter, the reply on behalf of the petitioner was received in the office of respondents No.1 to 3. After perusing the reply of the petitioner, respondents No.1 to 3 have decided not to initiate action in pursuance of notice dated 11.07.2022.

 In view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3, no further order is required to be passed in this writ petition. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (RAJ MOHAN SINGH) 06.08.2022 JUDGE Prince Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No