H.C. Arora v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 08.04.2026 H.C. ARORA ....Petitioner V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY, JUDGE

Present:

Mr. H.C. Arora, petition in person.

Mr. Jatinder Singh Gill, Advocate for respondent no.3 Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate for the respondent no. 4 Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. **** SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 5, i.e., Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, to conduct thorough inquiry into the collapsing of the Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) of Unit-II at Guru Hargobind Thermal Plant, Lehra Mohabbat, District Bathinda, and also to take action against the persons responsible for the said collapse.

2.

Respondent No. 3 has filed its reply, which is supported by an affidavit of Sh. Paranpal Singh Johal, Deputy Chief Engineer, PSPCL, Guru Hargobind Thermal Plant, Lehra Mohabbat. The relevant portions of paragraphs 3 and 5 of the reply, inter alia, state as under:- (3)Thus, the respondent has taken all the necessary steps for avoiding any such problem in future in relation to three running units. So far as Unit No. II is concerned. The damaged ESP has been disposed off vide sale order no. 01/GHTP-2023 dated

03.04.2023 and space has been evacuated on dated 23.08.2023. The Civil Works for laying of foundation has been completed and mechanical and electrical works of ESP and ash evacuation system has already been completed and the unit 2 has started generating power w.e.f. 03.04.2025. Therefore, there are no lapses on the part of the respondent.

(5) That it is pertinent to mention that the entire matter was put up before the while Time Director of PSPCL in its 300th Meeting held on 03.09.2024, wherein after considering the entire facts of the case, a decision was taken by the Whole Time Director of PSPCL, to initiate departmental proceedings against two officers, who were in charge at that time of collapse of ESP, in pursuance to the said decision show cause notices was issued to concerned officials and the copies of the same are attached as Annexure R-3/1. It is further submitted that the proceedings are still underway and the appropriate order will be passed after conclusion of the proceedings. 3.

From the reply filed by respondent No. 5, it is stated that no complaint has been received from respondent No. 3, as and when any such complaint would be received, appropriate action would be taken promptly in accordance with law.

4.

From the reply of respondent No. 3, it is obvious that corrective steps were taken to restart the collapsed unit after necessary repairs and replacements. It is also apparent that disciplinary action has also been initiated against the concerned officers by issuance of show cause notices. 5.

This Court hopes and expects that the said show cause notices are not treated as a merely formality and are taken to their logical end. In this regard, respondent No. 3 is directed to file a compliance report within a period of 60 days from the date of this order.

6.

In view of above, cause raised in the present petition has become infructuous 7.

Accordingly, present petition stands disposed of. 8.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 1.

(SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 08.04.2026 Kamal Gandhi Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No