Civil Writ Petition No.14984 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.14984 of 2008 Date of decision:01.09.2009. Tej Pal Singh Walia ...Petitioner Versus Punjab State Electricity Board and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. A.K.Kalsy, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Thiara, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL). This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the orders dated 18.04.2001 (P-3) and dated 06.11.2006 (P-4). Vide orders mentioned above, three electric meters, bearing Nos.MS-495, MS-526 and MS-616, installed in three separate adjoining premises of the petitioner, were clubbed and higher tariff was demanded from the petitioner. To say that at least load of electric meter bearing No.MS- 495 cannot be clubbed with other two meters, reliance has been placed upon a report made by an Experts Committee of the respondents on 20.06.2000 (P-1). Perusal of order dated 06.11.2006 (P-4) passed by Disputes Settlement Committee indicates that when upholding order Annexure P-3, passed by the authorities, clubbing load of electric meters mentioned above, no reference was made to the report made by Civil Writ Petition No.14984 of 2008 -2- the Experts Committee on 20.06.2000. Appeal was disposed of on a technical reason that some record was not produced before the Committee, by the petitioner. What record, it was necessary to be produced and how that was relevant to decide case of the petitioner is not mentioned in the order. Even in the written statement, it has nowhere been stated that on account of non-production of the documents, how merits of the case are going to the affected. Order Annexure P-4 passed by the Committee is mechanical one. Facts have not been discussed, which were taken note of by the Experts Committee when making spot inspection report, on 20.06.2000. It is not disputed on record that initially all the three electric meters were installed, in the separate adjoining premises, under orders passed by the competent authority of the respondents. There is no explanation as to why, at that time this objection, which is now being raised, was not considered by the authorities concerned. There is no evidence on record that after getting three separate electric connections, any opening was made to use the electricity from one meter to the adjoining premises. All these facts are required to be taken note of, when order under challenge was passed. In view of above, this writ petition is partly allowed. Orders Annexures P-3 and P-4 are set aside. The petitioner is directed to approach the Forum for redressal of grievances, constituted under Section 42(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the Forum shall dispose of appeal filed by the petitioner within two months, from the date of receipt of copy of this order. September 01, 2009 (JASBIR SINGH) vinod* JUDGE