HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.506 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.06.2010 **** Deepak Fashions Private Ltd. . . . . Petitioner VS. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and another . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondent No.1 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). In deference to the order dated May 19, 2010, Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Sub Divisional Officer of Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (DHBVNL), Civil Lines, Gurgaon, is present in Court. He submits that on account of his transfer from the above- stated place, that he could not appear before this Court earlier. His explanation is accepted. (2). In this Civil Writ Petition, the petitioner – an Industrial Unit of Udyog Vihar, Phase-VI, Gurgaon, seeks quashing of the order dated CWP No.506 of 2010.doc 06.08.2009 (Annexure P7) passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Service), Gurgaon, whereby, its prayer to charge for the electricity consumption at the reduced load as per its prayer, said to have been made in May, 2009, has been declined. (3). The order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat reveals that the petitioner failed to apply for reduction of power consumption load in the prescribed format along with the relevant documents and report of expert. The petitioner is harping upon an affidavit said to have been given on 4th May, 2009 with a request for reduction of the power load. Suffice it to say that the electricity load is sanctioned on the baiss of the estimated consumption report to be submitted by the consumer keeping in view the type of machines installed. The sanctioning of load is based upon the report of the expert which is duly verified by the authorities before its acceptance. (4). It is obvious that the petitioner was required to apply in the prescribed format along with a fresh report by the expert certifying the reduced consumption in the disclosed changed 2 - CWP No.506 of 2010.doc circumstances. No such exercise having been undertaken by the petitioner, no fault can be found with the impugned order dated 06.08.2009 (Annexure P7) passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat. (5). Dismissed (6). However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to pay the entire dues on the basis of the sanctioned load of 350 KV within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon receipt thereof, the respondents are directed to restore the connection subject to compliance of the other prescribed conditions, if any, within a period of one week. (7). Ordered accordingly. (8). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 29.06.2010 vishal shonkar 3 -