Writ petition filed to quash Lok Adalat order directing electricity department to restore connection. Court held no possessory rights were decided, civil litigation pending, and no ground for interference existed under Section 22-C of PUSSLRA.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No.12380 of 2016 (O&M)
1
205 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.12380 of 2016 (O&M). Date of Decision: 10.07.2019
Madan Lal
.......Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman, President Lok Adalat, Pubic Utility Services, Karnal and others
........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present:Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
None for respondent No.1.
Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Ms. Geeta Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
JITENDRA CHAUHAN J.
Through the instant civil writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of impugned order dated 23.05.2016 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.1 vide which application under Section 22-C of Public Utility Services and Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short “the Act”) filed by respondent No.2 was allowed.
The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 had filed a petition under Section 22-C of the Act before the Permanent Lok Adalat Public Utility Services, Karnal (for short “the Lok Adalat”) with the averments that he had electricity tubewell connection bearing
SANJAY 2019.09.02 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.12380 of 2016 (O&M)
2
No. K4-1256 in his name in village Nasirpur District Karnal. The electricity connection along with poles, transformer, wires etc. was stolen by some persons. An FIR No.329 dated 16.12.2015 under Section 427 IPC and Section 136 of Indian Electricity Act was also lodged in this regard. The petitioner had approached the electricity department several times for installation of the poles and transformer but in vain. After appreciating the evidence, the Lok Adalat had allowed the application and a direction was issued to the electricity department to restore the electricity connection No. K4-1256 of the petitioner by installing the electric poles, transformer, wires etc.
It is contended that the factum of tenancy was denied by the petitioner in civil litigation between the petitioner and respondent No.2 qua which RSA No.4076 of 1999 is pending with interim stay of execution. Learned Lok Adalat has not taken into consideration the civil litigation inter se the parties before the High Court while passing the impugned order and virtually decided possessory right inter se the parties by ordering restoration of utility services.
Heard.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that the learned Permanent Lok Adalat has ordered restoration of the electricity connection, the electric poles, transformer, wires etc. while taking into consideration the fact that the tubewell connection of respondent No.2 along with poles, transformer and wires was uprooted by certain persons on 13.12.2015 during night. In this regard, an FIR was also
SANJAY 2019.09.02 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.12380 of 2016 (O&M) 3
registered at the instance of AEE (OP) S/Division. This Court is of the opinion that the Learned Permanent Lok Adalat has not decided any possessory rights of the parties. It has merely ordered restoration of the electricity connection which was being enjoyed by respondent No.2 before it was uprooted. The impugned order does not have any bearing on the civil litigation pending between the parties.
No ground for interference is made out.
Dismissed.
| 10.0 | 7.2019. | (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) |
|---|---|---|
| SN | JUDGE | |
| Whether speaking/reasoned | : Yes/No |
|
| Whether reportable | : Yes/No |
SANJAY 2019.09.02 17:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the Permanent Lok Adalat order restoring electricity connectivity pending determination of civil possession dispute.
Madan Lal
The Chairman, President Lok Adalat, Pubic Utility Services, Karnal
JITENDRA CHAUHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
