The Punjab & Haryana High Court affirmed that, where proceedings before the State Electricity Regulatory Commission are stalled due to a vacancy (Member Legal), the Court may order that an interim arrangement for supply of electricity—by consent of the contesting parties—should continue until the interim application is decided by the Commission. This order upholds established jurisdiction and acts as binding precedent for similar regulatory impasses in the electricity sector until the adjudicatory body is duly reconstituted.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/31596/2025 of M/S KOTLA HYDRO POWER PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR Vs PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS |
| CNR | PHHC011714862025 |
| Date of Registration | 18-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 29-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Bench | Single bench (MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL) |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority for similar factual and procedural settings, particularly electricity supply cases during regulatory vacancies |
| Type of Law | Electricity Regulatory Law; Procedural Law (Interim Arrangements) |
| Questions of Law | Whether the High Court can direct continuation of an interim arrangement for supply of electricity when the State Electricity Regulatory Commission is unable to hear the matter due to a vacant post. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The Petitioner’s application before the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (PSERC) was pending, but the matter could not be fixed for hearing due to vacancy of Member Legal. The petitioner contended that it was left remediless. The respondent (PSPCL) had no objection to an interim arrangement for supply of electricity continuing till the Commission could hear and decide the petitioner’s application. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within Punjab & Haryana and statutory bodies in electricity sector within jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other State High Courts addressing similar regulatory commission vacancies |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- High Court affirms that it may intervene to grant interim relief where a regulatory commission is unable to function due to vacancies.
- Lawyers can rely on this precedent to seek interim arrangements when regulatory commissions are stalled for want of quorum or required membership.
- Express consent or no-objection by contesting respondent strengthens the case for such interim relief.
- The arrangement is provisional and co-terminus with the decision of the statutory commission when reconstituted.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the inability of the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission to hear the matter due to vacancy of the Member Legal, on the basis of the email communication cited in the record.
- Accepted the petitioner’s contention that absence of adjudication by the Commission left it remediless.
- Recorded the contesting respondent’s express no-objection to the interim arrangement for supply of electricity, aligning with efficient and consensual dispute facilitation.
- Ordered that the interim arrangement for supply of electricity shall continue pending final decision by the Commission on the petitioner’s interim application, ensuring neither party suffers due to administrative shortcomings of the regulatory commission.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- The petition before the PSERC cannot be heard due to vacancy of Member Legal.
- Petitioner is left remediless due to inability of Commission to adjudicate.
- Petitioner is ready to supply electricity in terms of previous order (Annexure P-6).
Respondent No. 1 (PSPCL):
- No objection to continuation of interim supply arrangement.
- Expressed that the arrangement can be continued until the Commission decides the interim application.
Factual Background
The petitioner, Kotla Hydro Power Private Limited, had a matter pending before the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (PSERC). Due to a vacancy in the position of Member Legal, PSERC was unable to schedule a hearing on the petitioner’s application. The petitioner approached the High Court contending that it was left remediless. The respondent-PSPCL, having no objection, agreed that the interim arrangement for electricity supply in terms of a prior order could continue until the Commission decided the interim application.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment referenced statutory regime requiring functioning of the regulatory commission for adjudication of disputes, which was rendered unworkable by the vacancy of Member Legal.
- The Court acted as a supervisory authority to ensure justice is not frustrated by procedural or administrative incapacity, and to bridge the gap until the Commission can perform its statutory functions.
- No explicit statutory section cited or interpreted beyond establishing procedural incapacity of the Commission and High Court’s power to grant interim relief in such circumstances.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural innovations were introduced in the judgment; the Court acted within established parameters to grant interim relief by consent.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing law regarding High Court’s jurisdiction to grant interim relief upheld; no prior precedent is overruled or narrowed.