Disposed¶32

M/S Randhawa Stone Crusher v. Hpsebl and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC6 Jun 2025CWP/9495/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Randhawa Stone Crusher v. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited; CWP No. 9495 of 2025; High Court of Himachal Pradesh; decided 06.06.2025; Section 126 Electricity Act 2003; provisional recovery notice dated 28.04.2025 quashed (Annexure P-1); alleged recovery Rs. 11,47,552/-; liberty to Board to proceed afresh per Section 126; Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Supply Code 2009; tampering allegations; assessment procedure.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the provisional recovery notice dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P-1); liberty to the respondent-Board to proceed afresh against the petitioner strictly in accordance with Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of accordingly. ¶32

M/S Randhawa Stone Crusher Vs Hpsebl and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the provisional recovery notice dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) was issued in violation of the statutory procedure under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (provisional assessment order, opportunity to the entity to respond and to be heard, and only thereafter a final assessment order).

¶32

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of by quashing Annexure P-1, dated 28.04.2025 (the provisional recovery notice), the primary challenge being that the provisions of Section 126 of the Act were not religiously followed.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is reserved to the respondent-Board to proceed against the petitioner, if so advised, viz-a-viz the cause which led to the issuance of Annexure P-1.

¶32

Key takeaways

Any such fresh proceedings must be conducted by following the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, in letter and spirit.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Himachal Pradesh High Court (Shimla, Single Bench — Ajay Mohan Goel, J.), CWP No. 9495 of 2025, decided 06.06.2025: With the consent of the parties, the writ petition by M/s Randhawa Stone Crusher against the respondents (Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another) was disposed of at the threshold. The provisional recovery notice dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) was quashed, the primary challenge being that the statutory procedure of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 had not been religiously followed. The respondent-Board was accorded liberty to proceed afresh against the petitioner viz-a-viz the cause which led to the notice, but strictly by following Section 126 in letter and spirit. Pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of accordingly. Alleged recoverable amount: Rs. 11,47,552/-.

¶1

2025:HHC:17977

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No. 9495 of 2025. Decided on : 06.06.2025

¶4

M/s Randhawa Stone Crusher.

¶5

…Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another.

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶10

For the petitioner : Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Shriyek Sharda, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate.

¶11

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral )

¶12

Notice. Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, learned counsel,

¶13

accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. On his instruction,

¶14

Ms. Sunita Sharma, learned Senior Counsel, has also put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.

¶15

With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is

¶16

being disposed of at this stage.

¶17

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶18

¶19

2025:HHC:17977

¶20

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter

¶21

alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶22

“1. Quash and set aside the impugned provisional recovery notice dated 28.04.2025 Annexure P-1 issued by the respondents.

¶23

2. Direct the Respondents to conduct any inspection regarding tampering allegations strictly in compliance with the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Supply Code, 2009, and only in the presence of the Petitioner or his representative ensuring fair opportunity for representation.

¶24

3. Restrain the Respondents from recovering the alleged amount of Rs. 11,47,552/- by adjusting or including it in the Petitioner’s future bills.”

¶25

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has

¶26

drawn the attention of the Court to the order dated 28.04.2025, Annexure P-1 and has submitted that the directions that have

¶27

been issued vide impugned notice are per se bad as the same are in fragrant violation of the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’). He submitted that in terms of the statutory provisions of Section 126 of the Act, firstly the Assessing Officer has to pass a

¶28

¶29

2025:HHC:17977

¶30

Provisional Assessment Order, copy whereof has to be provided to the concerned entity calling upon the entity to submit its response thereto and thereafter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the party concerned, the Final Assessment Order can be passed. He submitted that this statutory scheme has not been followed in the course of the passing of the impugned order.

¶31

Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents has submitted that though the respondents do no admit to the contention raised by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, however, in the backdrop of the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, appropriate order be passed but the interest of the respondent-Board be also protected.

¶32

Taking into consideration the fact that the primary challenge to the impugned order is on the ground that the provisions of Section 126 of the Act have not been religiously followed, this writ petition is disposed of by quashing Annexure P-1, dated 28.04.2025, but with liberty to the respondent-Board to proceed against the petitioner, if so advised, viz-a-viz the cause which led to the issuance of Annexure P-1, but by

¶33

¶34

2025:HHC:17977

¶35

following the provisions of Section 126 of the Electricity Act,

¶36

2003, in letter and spirit. Pending miscellaneous application(s),

¶37

if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶38

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶39