Read Time: 06 minutes

Supreme Court has issued notice in a plea challenging Sections 135 and 145, Electricity Act, 2003.

A Full Judge bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hrishikesh Roy, while issuing notice to the Learned Attorney General, said,

“We are of the considered view that the points raised in these SLPs require the assistance of Learned Attorney General for India. List the matter after three weeks.”

The petition is filed against the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which dismissed the Review Application of the Petitioner.

On October 25, 2012, the respondent initiated proceedings under Section 126, Electricity Act against the petitioner and his father. Both challenged the memo by the respondent before the Learned Civil Court Rania and Ellenabad.

Learned Nyayadhikari, Gram Nyaylaya, Rania vide order dated October 9, 2015, allowed the suit filed by the father of the petitioner on the same facts and law while Civil Judge, Ellenabad vide order dated August 31, 2016, dismissed the suit of the petitioner but allowed the issue of jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner.

Following this, ADJ Sirsa vide order dated October 30, 2019, dismissed appeal filed by the petitioner without taking into consideration that on the basis of the same facts, the suit for declaration filed by the petitioner’s father was allowed by the learned Nyayadhikari Gram Nyaylaya, Rania.

Against the aforementioned order, petitioner approached the High Court, where the Court dismissed the second appeal of the petitioner on the ground of jurisdiction.

“The High Court failed to appreciate that in a similar case filed by the father of the petitioner, the suit was allowed by Nyayadhikari, Rania and was not challenged anywhere and had attained finality,” the petitioners submit.

Questions of law raised by the petitioner:

1. Whether the High Court ought to have considered that the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain the cases of declaration against the electricity department under the Electricity Act, 2003?
2. Whether the High Court has appreciated the law and facts of the given case?
3. Whether the High Court has failed to consider that on a similar facts and circumstances the suit for declaration filed by the father of the petitioner against the electricity department was decreed and same has not been challenged by the respondents?
4. Whether the High Court failed to appreciate that the petitioner has filed the suit for declaration against the respondents/defendants on their illegal action taken by them which was against the law?
5. Whether the High Court failed to consider that the respondents have not followed the proper procedure as per the Electricity Act, 2003 to proceed against the petitioner?

“Hon’ble High Court has failed to appreciate that the meter of the petitioner was installed on the electricity pole lying on the road which is not in the control of the petitioner, therefore, any tamperings with the meter does not prima facie made out a case against the consumer,” says the plea.

The petition is drawn by Advocate Pushpinder Singh and filed by Advocate Shalini Kaul.

Case Title: Gurdev Singh v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited | SLP No. 6971-6972 of 2021