High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/21471/2021dismissed

Rupinderjeet Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd And Others

2021-10-26Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh2 pages

CWP-21471-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.21471 of 2021 Date of Decision:26.10.2021 RUPINDERJEET SINGH ......Petitioner Vs PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD AND OTHERS .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Mr.Atul Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. (Oral) Petitioner has preferred this petition for the issuance of writ of certiorari seeking quashing of order dated 17.08.2021 passed by Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) Sri Muktsar Sahib, whereby the application filed by the petitioner challenging the electricity bill dated 09.02.2016 for an amount of Rs.42,061/- was dismissed.

Perusal of the impugned order would show that petitioner is the consumer of electricity connection. Petitioner was served with a demand notice dated 09.02.2016 for recovery of the amount in question. The meter of the petitioner was checked on 24.10.2013 in the presence of the petitioner. The AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2021.10.27 13:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-21471-2021 enforcement party of the respondent-Corporation also checked the meter of the petitioner on 02.08.2013 and found that M.E. seals were broken. Directions were issued to replace the meter with new meter. Notice was also issued to the petitioner for replacement of the electric meter in his presence. Admittedly electric meter was removed in the presence of the petitioner and was sent to M.E. Lab. As per report of M.E. Lab M.E seals were found broken and body of the electric meter was found tempered with viz-a-viz CT circuit of electric meter. The report was also got signed from the petitioner. It was found to be a case of theft of electricity by the petitioner. Demand notice was served upon the petitioner on 14.11.2015 for an amount of Rs.44,100/- but the petitioner did not deposit the same. It was only after the audit conducted by the audit party, the demand notice for the amount of Rs..42,061/- was served upon the petitioner.

The factual details of the case could not be countered by the petitioner. No ground is made out to interfere with the impugned order.

Dismissed.

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) 26.10.2021 JUDGE Amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2021.10.27 13:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document