IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.9916 of 2009 Date of Decision: 08.07.2009 Punjab State Electricity Board and another Petitioners Versus B.V.M.Builders and Promoters Private Limited and another Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. Yashwinder Paul Singh, Advocate for the petitioners ….. Jasbir Singh, J. This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to an award dated 28.12.2008 (Annexure P1), passed by Permanent Lok Adalat at Ludhiana. Vide the impugned order the petitioners have been directed to give rebate @ 7.5% from the date of energisation of the transformer installed by the respondent No.1, after verifying its accounts in that regard. Record reveals that respondent No.1 filed an application under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authority Act 1987 for settlement of a dispute. It was its case that as per instructions of the petitioners it purchased and installed its own transformer outside its premises. Respondent No.1 was getting supply of electricity through HT lines, from the above said transformer. It was further stated that as per instructions of the petitioner, it is entitled to get rebate of electricity bills @ 7.5%. Despite claim made, no amount has been paid for the period from 2001 to 2004, which pushed the respondent No.1 to file an application before respondent Civil Writ Petition No.9916 of 2009 No.2. In the application, it was also stated that admittedly, rebate amount has been paid to respondent No.1 by the petitioners for the year 2004 and onward. The petitioners tried to refute claim of respondent No.1 before respondent No.2 by stating that respondent No.1 was not a consumer. No electric meter exists in its name. The bills for electric consumption are being sent in the name of Model Town Extension Club. Plea of the petitioners was negatived by respondent No.2 by observing as under:- “The electricity is being supplied by the respondents and the bills are issued in the name of Secretary D Block. Some dispute was going on between the applicant and the respondents. The applicant approached the DSA to consider his case but the DSA refused to listen the same on the plea that BVM Builders and Promoters are not the consumer of PSEB. The applicant approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court through a CWP No.5167 of 2003 tilted as M/s B.V.M. Builders etc. vs. Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala. The Hon’ble High Court has held that there is no concept of legal consumer. The consumer to whom electricity is supplied is definitely a consumer for the purpose of the Act. Therefore, the DSA could not have dismissed the appeal of the petitioner/ applicant as not maintainable. The DSA is directed to decided the appeal of the petitioner/ applicant on merits after hearing the representative of the petitioner/ applicant and the Board. Keeping in view the judgment of the Hon’ble 2 Civil Writ Petition No.9916 of 2009 High Court, the BVM Builders and Promotes Ltd. Is consumer of the Punjab State Electricity Board.” It is an admitted fact that earlier also, inter-se litigation between the petitioner and the respondent No.1, came to this Court in which it was observed that respondent No.1 was consumer of the petitioners. Before this Court to assail the impugned award, again that very argument has been reiterated, however, to prove to the contrary, neither judgment earlier passed by this Court has been brought on record nor it has been demonstrated as to how, why and under what circumstances the finding given above is not justified. On merits, it has not been disputed that respondent No.1 is being paid rebate @ 7.5% on electric consumption from the year 2004 onwards. If that is so, how that very claim can be denied to the petitioners for the period falling between installment of the transformer and till 2004. Counsel for the petitioners has failed to make out any case for interference by this Court. Dismissed. 08.07.2009 (Jasbir Singh) gk Judge 3