IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 177 (MS) OF 2009 Bharat Electronis Ltd. …………Petitioner. Versus Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. & others……….Respondents. Mr. R.K. Raizada, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.D. Upadhyay. Advocate for the respondents. 10th February, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Heard Mr. R.K. Raizada, counsel for petitioner as well as Mr. B.D. Upahdyay, counsel for Uttarakhand Power Corporation / respondents respectively. 2. By means of present writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.9.2008 passed by the respondent no. 3 i.e. Ombudsman (Electricity), State of Uttarakhand in an Appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 45 of the Electricity Act, 2003, whereby the petitioner had challenged recovery of penalty, which was made against the petitioner, who is admittedly a consumer of Uttarakhand Power Corporation. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that vide impugned order, the respondent no. 3 directed the petitioner to deposit entire amount before hearing of the appeal itself. In the order dated 24th September, 2008 Ombudsman (Electricity) has also observed that a dilatory tactics is being adopted by the petitioner by submitting one document after another and therefore, this aspect also seems to have been with the respondent no. 3 while passing the said order. Admittedly, the petitioner is a Government Company. The Power Corporation and the Regulatory Commission are also instrumentalities of the State. 4. In view of the facts stated above, it is in the interest of justice that a direction is made to the respondent no. 3 / Ombudsman (Electricity), State of Uttarakhand to pass an order in the appeal moved by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one month. Before this, both the petitioner as well as respondents no. 1 to 5 will complete their pleadings. It is further directed that the amount (of a sum of Rs. 34,58,024/-), which has been alleged to be recovered from the petitioner by way of penalty and late payment surcharge will be deposited by the petitioner before the respondent no. 3/ Ombudsman (Electricity) by the petitioner within ten days from today by way of an FDR drawn in favour of Uttarakhand Power Corporation. It is made clear that the amount which is being deposited by the petitioner shall remain with the respondent no. 3 / Ombudsman (Electricity), till the decision is taken by the Ombudsman and will go to either of the parties depending upon the fate of the appeal. 5. The above period of one month shall commence from the day, the amount is deposited before the Ombudsman by the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of alongwith the pending application. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 10.2.2009 Rathour