Petition No.

27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SITE NO. 3, BLOCK B, SECTOR 18-A MADHYA MARG, CHANDIGARH

Petition No. 27 of 2024

alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025
Date of Order: 26.05.2025

Petition under Section 43 of the Electricity Act,

2003 read with Regulation 5.1 of the supply Code,
2014 and other relevant rules and regulations as
approved by Hon’ble Commission including 68, 69,
70, 71 and 72 and other relevant provision of
Chapter XIII of the conduct of Business
Regulations 2005 as amended up to date and the
provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 for directing
the Respondents to render respective permanent
Domestic Supply Electricity Connection to the
Petitioners for their residential houses in the
colony
With a further prayer to direct the respondents not
to disconnect the temporary electricity meter
connection given to the residents at the time of
construction of their respective houses
With a further prayer to grant urgent and
immediate hearing of the matter.
For passing any other relief in favour of the
Petitioner as this Hon’ble Commission may deem
fit in the facts and circumstances of the cases.
And
In the matter of: Pavinder Kaur and Others.
…..Petitioners
Versus
Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL)
and Others.
…..Respondents
Commission: Sh. Viswajeet Khanna, Chairperson
Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Member
Petitioner: Sh. Munish Gulati, Advocate

1
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

PSPCL: Sh. Baljinderpal Singh, AEE/TR-5

Sh. Inderpreet Singh, ASE

ORDER

The petition has been filed by the residents of JTPL City

situated at Sector-115, Kharar, Landran Road, SAS Nagar, Mohali
under Section 43 of Electricity Act, 2003 read with Regulation 5.1 of
Supply Code, 2014 including Regulations 68, 69, 70, 71 and 72 of
Chapter XIII of Conduct of Business Regulation, 2005 for rendering
permanent domestic supply connection to their residential houses in
the colony.

1. The petitioners submitted as under:

1.1 The petitioners are the residents of a residential colony

known as JTPL City, situated at Sector-115, Kharar
Landran Road, SAS Nagar, Mohali. They have respective
houses/flats in the above said colony and as such there are
almost 700 houses in the colony wherein almost 550
families are residing. Petitioners have authorized Pavinder
Kaur who is Petitioner No. 1 in the present petition and also
a resident of the aforesaid colony and has been authorized
by Petitioner No. 2 to 12 for filing the present petition on
behalf of the petitioners. Pavinder Kaur wife of Sh.
Jaswinder Singh is also well conversant with the facts of
the instant case.

1.2 The colony has been developed by the company/ Builder

namely M/s JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd. and the plots/
houses/flats have been sold to the persons like the
petitioners. The majority of the residents of the society were

2
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

having domestic electricity connection and the petitioners,

who have purchased plots and constructed their houses
and bought flats from the company/builder M/S JTPL
Township Pvt. Ltd. either have temporary electricity
connection, which were allotted by the respondents at the
time when the petitioners started construction of their
houses and now the construction of the houses has been
completed and owners have applied for domestic electricity
connection but the authorities have refused to allot the
domestic electricity connection to the petitioners. They
were continuously paying electricity bills of temporary
meters. The others petitioners who have bought flats in the
aforementioned society from M/s JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd.,
flats do not have domestic electricity connection and they
are getting electricity supply through generators which are
hired by the residents/petitioners themselves.

1.3 The petitioners, who are having the temporary electricity

connection allotted by PSPCL, Kharar, were duly paying
the electricity charges on account of consumption made by
the petitioners on the pretext that the authorities i.e. PSPCL
would provide the domestic electricity connection as and
when required or applied by the petitioners.

1.4 The petitioners went to PSPCL for the domestic electricity

connection and it transpired that there was some dispute
going on between the M/s. JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd. and
PSPCL, Kharar and due to this reason, PSPCL authorities
had refused to issue domestic electricity connection to the
petitioners. Accordingly, it was the fault of the M/s JTPL
3
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

Township Pvt. Ltd. due to which the present petitioners

were suffering on account of refusal of providing domestic
electricity connection.

1.5 Due to the sins and wrongs of the developer i.e. M/s JTPL
Township Pvt. Ltd. the innocent petitioners who have been
cheated by the developer were unnecessarily made to
suffer. The petitioners have been regularly paying the
electricity bill for the temporary meter, which has been
allotted at the time of construction of the houses and other
petitioners, who have bought the flats in the society have
no electricity connection and they were using the private
generator on rent and petitioners were made to suffer
without any fault. The petitioners have time and again
approached PSPCL for rendering respective electricity
connections, however, PSPCL has flatly refused the
petitioners to render electricity connection to any of the
houses in the colony.

1.6 The petitioners by no stretch of the imagination can be held

responsible for the sins and wrongs committed by the
developer and as per the provisions of the Electricity Act as
also the regulations framed by the Commission from time to
time, were entitled to getting individual connections for the
houses. The petitioners have constructed their houses after
getting the registry done and have got the map passed
from the Municipal Corporation, Kharar for construction
after depositing the required fees. It is worth mentioning
here that without domestic electricity connections the
petitioners were not able to live in their dwelling houses.
4
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

1.7 As per the Electricity Supply Instructions Manual

Regulation 3.3 (C), NOC is not required for the release of
connection for domestic Supply/Industrial/ Commercial use
of electricity. Further as per Commercial Circular No. 19 of
2017 issued by PSPCL itself on the basis of the instructions
issued by the Government of Punjab, it has been held that
NOC /CLU is not required for the release of electricity
connection/Extension of Load/demand for domestic,
Industrial and commercial category anywhere in the state of
Punjab.

1.8 The petitioners in terms of the regulations framed by the

Commission are willing to pay the requisite charges to
PSPCL for the release of respective electricity connections
to the petitioners for the houses. The petitioners cannot be
left in the lurch in this manner by PSPCL and PSPCL being
the sole Distribution License in the state was bound to
render electricity connections to the petitioners for their
houses.

1.9 As per section 43 of the Electricity Act, PSPCL is bound to

render connectivity to the petitioner being the sole
distribution Licensee in the state of Punjab, however,
PSPCL instead of performing its duties is unnecessarily
harassing the petitioners, who were innocent residents of
the colony and do not possess any technical know- how in
the subject matter. The petitioners further quoted Section
43 of the Electricity Act as under:

“Section 43. (Duty to supply on request): ---

5
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

1
(1) [Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every
distribution] licensee, shall, on an application by the
owner or occupier of any premises, give supply of
electricity to such premises, within one month after
receipt of the application requiring such supply:
Provided that where such supply requires extension of
distribution mains, or commissioning of new sub-
stations, the distribution licensee shall supply the
electricity to such premises immediately after such
extension or commissioning or within such period as
may be specified by the Appropriate Commission:
Provided further that in case of a village or hamlet or
area wherein no provision for supply of electricity
exists, the Appropriate Commission may extend the
said period as it may consider necessary for
electrification of such village or hamlet or area.
1
[Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section,
"application" means the application complete in all
respects in the appropriate form, as required by the
distribution licensee, along with documents showing
payment of necessary charges and other compliances.]
(2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to
provide, if required, electric plant or electric line for
giving electric supply to the premises specified in sub-
section (1):
Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand, or
to continue to receive, from a licensee a supply of
electricity for any premises having a separate supply
unless he has agreed with the licensee to pay to him
such price as determined by the Appropriate
Commission.
(3) If a distribution licensee fails to supply the electricity
within the period specified in sub-section (1), he shall
be liable to a penalty which may extend to one
thousand rupees for each day of default.”
6
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

1.10 The petitioners were willing to pay the requisite charges for
seeking new connections for their houses, in terms of the
regulations framed by the Commission from time to time.
Thus, PSPCL cannot be permitted to refuse new electricity
connections to the petitioners for their respective houses.
PSPCL cannot be permitted to practice a pick and choose
policy. PSPCL, by refusing the petitioners’ request to grant
electricity connections for their houses, was showing its
dominance being the sole distribution licensee and was
working on the might is right fundamentals.

On various occasions and from time to time, the Hon'ble

courts have rendered kind indulgence on similar issues
being faced by similarly placed persons, upon which the
distribution licensee has been directed to immediately
provide the connectivity to the residents. In case of Ravi
Dutt Badyal vs. PSPCL and others, while deciding Civil
Misc. No. 5737 in CWP No 34999 of 2019, vide order dated
20.07.2020, Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court was
pleased to pass the following order

“CM-5737-CWP-2020
1. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.5/Builder
states that the laying of electricity cables for the
Petitioner's plot will be completed within one week
from today.
2. As regards providing the electricity connection to the
Applicant/ Petitioner's plot, it appears that the plot
was not part of the Mega Housing Project. It is part of
a colony which was subsequently regularized by the
competent authority of the local government in
Patiala. It appears that the plot is under the
7
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

jurisdiction of the Municipal Council, Kharar

3. Learned counsel for the Punjab State Power
Corporation Ltd (PSPCL) states that a separate
electricity line has to be laid to the Petitioner's plot for
providing electricity connection. Learned counsel for
the Petitioner, on instructions, states that the
Petitioner is prepared to pay the requisite charges for
the laying of such line as per regulations".
4. Mr. Sehajbir Singh, Advocate for the PSPCL states
that within two weeks from today, the Petitioner will
be informed about the requisite charges that have to
be paid by him for laying of the line from the
transformer, as per regulations.
5. It will be open to the Petitioner, if aggrieved by such
decision of the PSPCL, to seek appropriate remedies
in accordance with law.
6. The application is disposed of in the above terms.

1.11 The petitioners are living with their families under threat of
disconnection of the temporary connection also allotted to
them by PSPCL at the time of construction and the
petitioners who have no electricity connection are spending
huge amounts of money on hiring a generator for running
electricity in their houses. The petitioners have been
running from pillar to post to seek legitimate electricity
connections from PSPCL. However, PSPCL was not willing
to render connections to the petitioners for reasons best
known to it.

The petitioners have craved the kind indulgence of the

Commission for directing PSPCL to render permanent
electricity connections to the petitioners for their respective
houses, for which the petitioners were duly entitled as per

8
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

law. In fact, as such no reason arises for refusing the

petitioners electricity connection for their respective
houses.
1.12 That, the most of the requisite part of the LD system was
already laid down/available in the colony, by way of which
presently the electricity was being supplied to a majority of
the families/residents of the society. Thus, there was no
reason for PSPCL for not rendering permanent electricity
connections for their respective houses to the petitioners,
especially once the petitioners were also willing to pay the
applicable service connection charges as per the
regulations framed by the Commission.

1.13 The cries of the petitioners, despite various requests, have

fallen on the deaf ears of PSPCL. On one pretext or the
other the petitioners are being harassed at the hand of
PSPCL, for no fault of the petitioners. The petitioners
cannot be unnecessarily burdened because of the sins and
wrongs committed by the developer i.e. M/S. JTPL
Township Pvt. Ltd.

1.14 The petitioners humbly submits that they have a right to live
a peaceful dignified life and PSPCL, by not rendering
permanent electricity connections to the petitioners, is
impinging upon the life and liberty of the petitioners.
Further, the upcoming summer season might worsen their
condition.

1.15 Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh has

observed that the right to a electricity connection is a

9
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

fundamental right enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian

Constitution. Therefore, refusal to grant an electricity
connection to a household, who has constructed a house or
flat is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

1.16 The Commission, while adjudicating upon petition No. 22 of

2020 vide interim order dated 02.11.2020 has Inter-alia
held that residents cannot be denied essential electricity
services and therefore, till the such time as the matter has
resolved, PSPCL is obligated to provide supply to the
residents.

1.17 The Commission while adjudicating a similar matter in case

of Gulmohar City Vs PSPCL, in petition No. 48 of 2020 vide
its interim order dated 15.03.2021 in IA No. 7 of 2021 has
inter-alia passed the following order:

After hearing the counsel and the officers of PSPCL,

the Commission directs PSPCL to release electricity
connections to the residents of Gulmohar Residency
after Service Connection Charges/other applicable
charges as per the Cost Data approved by the
Commission within the time limits specified in
Regulation 8 of the Supply Code, 2014 subject to the
final order in the instant petition. A separate account of
the expenditure incurred by PSPCL on release of these
connections may be kept and the amount may be
recovered from the developer or the delinquent
officials/officers as per applicable law. It is reiterated
that the above interim directions to PSPCL have been
issued keeping in view the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the present case and are not
necessarily applicable to other cases.
1.18 Once PSPCL conceded and applied for seeking approval

10
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

from the Commission to erect LD system by PSPCL and

release of electricity connections in those licensed colonies
where developers sold plots/flats without obtaining NOC
from PSPCL or where developers after obtaining NOC
have abandoned the project without installing the LD
system, therefore, no prejudice shall be caused to PSPCL
in case a similar order, as in case of in petition No. 48 of
2020, vide interim order dated 15.03.2021 in IA No. 7 of
2021, is passed by the Commission in the instant case.

1.19 The Commission vide order dated 30.07.2021 in petition No

13 of 2021 directed PSPCL to render regular/permanent
electricity connections to the residents of a similarly placed
colony known as Sunny Enclave, Patiala while charging
service connection charges and applicable charges. Thus,
a similar relief may kindly also be granted in the favor of the
petitioners.

1.20 Hon'ble Delhi High court, in a case titled as "Sudarshan

Kumar Sharma and another Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and
others" writ petition(c) 13217 of 2019 has observed that
there is no gainsaying that electricity is an essential service
to which a person cannot be deprived without cogent,
lawful reasons.

1.21 Hon'ble Supreme court in Criminal Appeal no. 810 of 2022

titled as "Dalip (Dead) through LRs Vs. Satish and others"
has held that it is now a well settled proposition of law that
electricity is a basic amenity from which a person cannot be
deprived. Electricity cannot be declined to a tenant on the

11
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

ground of failure/refusal of the landlord to issue an NOC. All

that the electricity supply authorizes is required to examine
is whether the appellant/applicant for electricity connection
is in occupation of the premises in question.

1.22 Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, in a case titled as

"Om Parkash Vs. Balkar Singh", has observed that
electricity being a basic necessity, is an integral part of the
right to life as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution
of India. Therefore, as long as the petitioner is in
possession of the suit property, he cannot be deprived of
electricity.

1.23 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ashish Gupta Vs.
Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited writ petition (C) 890
of 2022 has directed the respondents that the application of
the petitioner shall be processed and electricity connection
shall be installed within two working days of the petitioner
completing all the formalities and the petitioner shall not
seek an adjustment of the security deposit. In this case,
Hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed that electricity is
one of the fundamental rights for existence under Article 21
of the Constitution of India, subject to compliance with other
requirements.

1.24 It is a settled law, again and again reiterated by the Hon'ble

High Courts in India and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
that under Article 21 electricity is a basic necessity. Article
21 falls under Part-3 of the constitution available to all
citizens and it is a part of right to life and personal dignity. It

12
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

also ensured a right to have a dignified life.

1.25 The Commission, in Petition No.47 of 2021, has directed

PSPCL to extricate the residents from their hardship due to
lack of electricity connection. The Commission, vide order
dated 23.11.2021, as an interim measure directed PSPCL
to release electricity connections to petitioners after
recovery of Service Connection Charges/other applicable
charges as per the Cost Data approved by the Commission
within the time limits specified in Regulation 8 of the Supply
Code, 2014 subject to the final order in the instant petition.

1.26 The petitioner humbly submits that in case the instant

matter is not taken up immediately and the petitioners are
not rendered regular electricity connections in the interim,
the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

1.27 The petitioners accordingly prayed to the Commission to

allow the urgent and immediate hearing of the matter, to
direct PSPCL to render respective permanent domestic
electricity connection to them for their residential houses in
the colony. It was further prayed that during the pendency
of the present petition, PSPCL be directed to immediately
provide respective domestic electricity connection to them.

1.28 The petitioners also filed IA No.05 of 2025 praying for

interim directions to PSPCL to release domestic electricity
connections till the pendency of the petition in the interest
of justice.

2. Vide Order dated 23.05.2024 the respondents were directed to

file their reply on admission with a copy to the petitioner within

13
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

two weeks and the petitioner was directed to file the rejoinder
within a week thereafter.

3. During the hearing on 07.08.2024, the Commission observed that

the petitioner has neither impleaded the developer nor the
licensing authority as respondents in the petition. Further, the
counsel for the petitioners submitted that PSPCL has filed its
reply on 06.08.2024 and requested for the time to file the
rejoinder and to amend the memo of parties accordingly. Vide
Order dated 12.08.2024, the petitioner was allowed to file the
same along with rejoinder within two weeks with a copy to
PSPCL.

4. PSPCL filed its reply vide memo no.6191 dated 06.08.2024 and
submitted as under:

4.1 The developer has obtained the NOC for their 69.40 Acre
residential project namely JTPL Township from the office of
CE/Commercial Patiala vide memo no. 1914-16 dated
19.12.2008. The total projected load of the 69.40 Acre
project was 3500 kVA. This projected load was proposed to
be fed from 132 kV S/S Kharar by erecting new 11 kV JTPL
feeder But the developer had not executed their work after
getting the NOC. In the mean time, the developer had
revised their layout plan from 69.40 Acre to 50.9 Acre and
obtained the revised NOC from the office of CE/
Commercial Patiala vide memo no. 169 dated 22.2.2013,
and the total projected load of the colony was 2892 kVA.
This colony was to be fed from the newly proposed 66 kV
Grid at Chajju Majra by erecting a 3.9 kM long 11 kV feeder

14
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

from the proposed grid up to JTPL premises. The total

estimated expenditure of Rs 4,62,78,356/- was to be
incurred on the LD system under which a total of 7 no. 300
kVA & 6 no. 200 kVA DTS were to be installed.

4.2 The land for construction of the new 66 kV Grid at

Chajjumajra was not made available, but in the mean time
land at Gillco Township, Sector-115 was arranged for the
construction of the 66 kV Grid. This 66 kV Grid is situated
1.2 kM away from the JTPL colony. The proposal to provide
electrical connectivity to the colony was revised from
Chajjumajra to Gillco Grid. Further the developer gave a
request to release a 700 kW partial load from the nearest
feeder till the commissioning of the new 66 kV Gillco grid.
Accordingly the developer got partial load connectivity
approval from the office of CE/Commercial vide memo no.
2111/PUDA/L-422 dated 11/05/2013. This approval was
subject to the deposit of all charges mentioned in the
revised NOC dated 22/2/2013 and compliance of CC
05/2011 under which the BG of remaining LD works was to
be obtained.

4.3 The developer submitted an online application for the

revised NOC vide RID No. 21193 dated 19.10.2022. Due to
the revision in the layout plan and increase of the project
area from 50.90 acre to 77.0325 acre, the load of the
project increased from 2602.80 kW/2982 kVA to 4365.88
kW/4850.98 kVA.

4.4 As per the license issued by O/o ADC (UD), SAS Nagar

15
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

vide memo No. ADC/UD/2022/404 dtd 08.02.2022, validity

of License No. LDC-1/2008 for land measuring 69.40 acre
& License No. LDC/CA-3DDLG/PTA-2013/66 dtd
17.06.2013 for 9.97 acres, was valid upto 31.12.2022. For
processing the NOC case, a valid license was required.
ADC (UD), SAS Nagar was requested to provide the
present status of the validity of the license. Reply from the
O/o ADC (UD), SAS Nagar was awaited.

4.5 The colony was developed by M/s. JTPL city township,

Sector 115 Kharar, Mohali. The regular connections in the
approved 50.90 acre layout of JTPL (in which the NOC had
been obtained by the developer from the office of CE
Commercial PSPCL, Patiala vide memo no. 169 dated
22.02.2013) were being released regularly. The developer
got their layout plan revised from 50.90 acre to 77.0325
acre and submitted the online application vide RID No.
21193 dt.19.10.22 for the revised NOC and the same was
pending with the developer for completing the requisite
documents. In the mean time, the firm of the developer
dissolved and came under a moratorium period under the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code-2016. The case is
pending with NCLT bench Delhi.

4.6 44 nos. temporary connections were released for

construction purpose to the residents of M/s. JTPL city
township, sector 115, Kharar, Mohali out of which 4 No.
connections were released for construction purpose in the
newly added residential pocket. The regular connections in
the approved 50.90 acre layout of JTPL, in which the NOC
16
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

was obtained by the developer from the office of CE

Commercial PSPCL, Patiala vide memo no. 169 dated
22.02.2013, were being released regularly. No new
permanent connection under any category was released in
the extended area of the project for which the developer
had not obtained the NOC.

4.7 There was no dispute between PSPCL and the developer.

The regular connections were already being given in the
approved 50.90 acre area as the developer had obtained
the NOC of this part. The petitioners are part of the
extended layout area, which was not included in the 50.90
acre pocket and hence no new permanent connections
under any category are being released in the extended
pocket.

4.8 The petitioners were not being harassed by PSPCL. Rather

petitioners can get the extension of period of the temporary
connection as and when required. PSPCL was not using a
pick and choose policy. The connections to the petitioners
were denied because the petitioners were seeking
connections in the extended pocket of the colony which
was not covered under the already issued NOC by PSPCL.
So PSPCL cannot release connections to this area. Though
PSPCL is the sole distribution licensee in the state, but
connections will be released to the residents as per
Regulation 6.7.1 of the Supply Code, 2014. Further, the
colony cannot be considered as an abandoned colony
under the commercial circular 43/2023 because the license
issued to developer by the competent authority was neither
17
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

cancelled nor suspended. The period of temporary

connections can be extended further if the consumer fulfills
the requisite criteria framed by PSPCL.

4.9 The LD system has been erected by the developer in the

extended pocket of the colony but the NOC for the same
was not obtained by the developer. So, the existing LD
system cannot be taken for releasing permanent
connections in the extended portion of the colony for which
the developer has not taken an NOC.

5. The petitioner submitted its rejoinder to PSPCL’s reply on

11.09.2024 and stated as under:

5.1 The present petition has been filed by the residents due to
the denial/ refusal of PSPCL for releasing the domestic
electricity connection to the applicant/petitioners and other
residents of the JTPL city society, Sector 115 kharar,
Mohali.

5.2 As submitted by PSPCL, the society had been approved

with a 50.90 acre layout plan for which the developer of the
society had obtained the NOC from the department. The
petitioners are from a part of the extended layout area which
was not included in the 50.90 acre pocket and hence no
new connections under any category are being released in
the extended pocket. Further, it was submitted by PSPCL
that the developer has got its layout plan revised from 50.90
acre to 77.0325 acre and has submitted an online
application vide RID No. 2193 dated 19.10.22 for the
revised NOC and same was pending with the licensee for

18
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

completing the required documents. If this is the reason for

not releasing the new electricity connections to the
petitioners then how is the Tehsildar, Kharar continuing in
doing the registries of the plots and the flats which fall in the
extended pocket and for which NOC has not been obtained
from the department. Even the EO, Kharar is accepting the
EDC for approving the map for the construction of new
houses in the JTPL city society.

5.3 Commercial Circular No. 19 of 2017 bearing memo number

377 381 SR 54 issued by Dy. CE/Regulation PSPCL Patiala
was referred to and it was submitted that Hon'ble Governor
has also passed an order dated 16.04.2017 which says that
there is no requirement of an NOC or CLU for release of
new electricity connections or extension of load or demand
for domestic or industrial or commercial use in the state of
Punjab. By submitting that the developer has not obtained
an NOC from the office of CE/Commercial PSPCL for the
extended layout plan, there is a violation of the circular
which was issued by the Dy./CE/Regulations PSPCL,
Patiala and the order of the Hon'ble Governor of Punjab,
dated 16.04.2017.

5.4 As submitted by PSPCL, new electricity connections are

being continuously given in the 50.90 acre layout plan and
not given in the extended pocket of the layout plan.
However, there is a list which is available in PSPCL’s office
according to which if the plot number or flat number is in the
list then they would be given the electricity connection,
otherwise the new electricity connection would not be
19
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

released to the residents.

5.5 The office of ADC (Urban development) S.A.S Nagar, vide

letter number ADC 2024/6463, had written to Additional
Superintending Engineer, Operations Division, PSPCL,
Kharar in response to his memo no.4462/65 dated
07.06.2024 that Licence number LDC-01/2008 was given to
M/S JTPL Pvt. limited through Municipal Corporation,
Kharar for the development of 69.40 acres and further for
the development of 9.97 acres. Licence number LDC/ CA/3
DDLG/PTA 2013/66 dated 17.06.2013 was issued and there
are no rules of the government for extending the licence
which was issued 7 years ago and hence the renewal of the
above said licence is not being considered at the moment.

In the light of the above, the licence of the developer is

considered to be expired cancelled or suspended. In that
eventuality, commercial circular no. 43 of 2023 of the
Punjab Govt. would apply wherein it is mentioned that if the
licence of the developer is cancelled or suspended then the
society shall be considered as an abandoned colony and
PSPCL shall release electricity connections to the residents.

5.6 In their reply, PSPCL has admitted that the LD system in the
society is completed in the new pocket also and they are not
giving new electricity connections to the consumers or
inhabitants, as the NOC has not been issued for the
extended pocket of the society and hence they cannot issue
or give new electricity connections to the residents.

The Electricity Supply to the citizen is enshrined as a

20
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Indian

constitution and by not providing the electricity connection to
the residents, the respondents are violating the fundamental
right of the petitioners, which is not permitted. Hon'ble
Supreme Court and High courts have repeatedly observed
in various judgments that an electricity connection cannot be
refused to the citizens by the supplier and it is well observed
in Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 also. Hence PSPCL
is violating the fundamental rights of the petitioners and
ignoring the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
High courts and Punjab State Electricity Regulatory
Commission, issued from time to time.

6. The petition was taken up for hearing on admission on

18.09.2024. The Commission observed that the petitioner filed
the memo of parties impleading only M/s JTPL Pvt. Ltd as a
respondent but the licensing authority has not been impleaded as
respondent in the petition. The counsel for the petitioner
requested for time to amend the memo of parties. The
Commission directed, vide Order dated 20.09.2024, that the
licensing authority was a necessary party for the proper
adjudication of the matter and the petitioner should file a revised
memo of parties within two weeks, impleading M/s JTPL Pvt. Ltd.
and the licensing authority as respondents.

7. The petition was admitted vide Order dated 21.11.2024. The

petitioner filed the revised memo of the parties. The Commission
directed that the notice be issued to the respondents to file their
replies to the petition within two weeks and the petitioner was
directed to file its rejoinder thereto within one week thereafter.
21
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

8. The petitioner filed the revised memo of parties impleading

M/s JTPL Pvt. Ltd., Greater Mohali Area Development Authority
and Punjab Urban Development Authority as respondents on
03.01.2025 which was taken on record and notice was issued to
the respondents to file their reply in the petition.

During the hearing on 08.01.2025, the petitioner submitted an

application for impleading the Additional Deputy Commissioner
(ADC) (Urban Development), Mohali as respondent No. 6. The
counsel for the petitioner submitted that presently only the ADC,
Urban Development, Mohali was the necessary party for
adjudication of the matter. Keeping in view the statement of
counsel for the petitioner, vide Order dated 10.01.2025, ADC,
Urban Development, Mohali was impleaded as respondent in the
petition and GMADA and the Punjab Urban Development
Authority were struck off from the list of the respondents. The
petitioner also filed an application for placing on record the
amended minutes of meeting wherein four more residents have
authorized the petitioner to represent them also in the petition.
The Commission directed that the copy of the application be
provided to the respondents, for the respondents to file their reply
to the petition as well as the application submitted by the
petitioner within two weeks with a copy to the petitioner. The
petitioner was directed to file its rejoinder to the replies filed by
the respondents within one week thereafter with a copy to the
respondents.

9. In the hearing held on 18.02.2025 the representative appearing

for the ADC, Urban Development, Kharar, Mohali requested for
time to file a reply. The Commission, vide Order dated
22
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

19.02.2025, directed that the same may be filed within 2 weeks

with a copy to the petitioner as well as to the other parties. The
Commission observed that JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd. has not filed
its reply. JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd. was granted one last
opportunity to file its reply with a copy to the other parties.

10. The ADC Urban Development, SAS Nagar, Kharar filed his reply
vide memo no.1763 dated 11.03.2025 and submitted as under:

10.1 The petition does not relate to their office, thus a short reply
is being filed. However, they are bound to file a detailed
reply it the Commission so directs later on at any stage.

10.2 Two licenses under the provision of Punjab Apartment and

Property Regulation Act 1995 were granted i.e., vide No.66
Dated 07/06/2013 (actual date 17.06.2013) for developing
land as a residential/commercial colony to JTPL Township
Pvt. Ltd., Sector 115, District SAS Nagar (Area 9.97 Acre)
and to M/s JTPL Township Pvt. Ltd., F-82, District Center,
Shivaji Palace, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi (M/s JTPL
Township Pvt. Ltd. Sector 115, SAS Nagar Mohali) vide
License No.LDC-1/2008 Dated 22/07/2008 in Village Sante
Majra & Khuni Majra (Kharar), District Mohali for an area
measuring 69.40 acres for the same purpose. These
licenses were granted to the promoter by the then Deputy
Director, Local Bodies, Patiala as competent authority.

10.3 These Licenses were granted on certain terms and

conditions as mentioned in the license and in condition
No.6, 7 and 8, the terms regarding supply of electricity &
installation of equipments regarding the same were

23
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

mentioned as under:-

6. Electrification will be carried out as per the design

and specification approved by the Punjab State
Power Corporation under their strict supervision.
7. The electrical plan/load will be got approved from
PSPCL before execution of work as per
specification/Norms.
8. Promoter will obtain confirmed/final NOC from
PSPCL, within 90 days from the issue of license,
failing which penal action shall be initiated against
the promoter under the relevant provisions of
PAPRA Act 1995 and rules made there under.

In the above said terms & conditions, it was the duty of the
promoter to ensure that the electric installations for the
supply of electricity to the colony/residents are laid in the
colony.
10.4 The representative of the residents of JTPL Township met
the ADC/UD and requested that basic amenities including
electric infrastructure have not been provided by the builder
in the colony. Thus, a show cause notice was issued vide
office memo no ADC(UD)-2024/7783 dated 01.10.2024 for
an explanation as to why the basic amenities have not
been provided including electric infrastructure as per the
terms of license and a reply in this regard was directed to
be submitted in office of the competent authority within a
period of 21 days failing which action was to be taken
against the developer as per the acts and rules, including
cancellation of license as per sub-section 14 of section 5 of
the above said act. In response to the above said letter,

24
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

CMA Sandeep Goyal, the Resolution professional

appointed by the NCLT, replied vide email dated
21.10.2024, on behalf of M/s JTPL Pvt. Ltd., that "M/s JTPL
Pvt. Ltd., is currently undergoing the Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process (CIRP) before the Hon'ble National
Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (Court-III), as per the
order dated 15.04.2024. In accordance with the provisions
of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, the
management of the Corporate Debtor has been suspended
and the undersigned CMA Sandeep Goel has been
appointed as the Resolution Professional of the company
by the same order. As the Resolution Professional, the
undersigned is responsible for conducting the CIRP and no
show-cause notice can be issued to the Corporate Debtor."

10.5 In view of the above said letter, no further action has been
taken by this office. A meeting was held on 02.12.2024 to
resolve the above mentioned issue and the Executive
Engineer of PSPCL has informed in the meeting that the
bank guarantee furnished by the builder in their office has
lapsed and now they have sent the claim for the electric
infrastructure to the NCLT.

10.6 PSPCL can proceed to provide infrastructure in the colony

under rules in view of the hardships being faced by
residents of the colony. No action can be taken in this
regard at this stage by this office. The electricity installation
like transformer poles are not covered under EDC (External
Development Charges), so the builder is bound to provide
this amenity to the purchasers as per the terms and
25
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

conditions of the license, at their level.

10.7 The promoter has not deposited all the charges of EDC
with this office as well as in the office of concerned
Municipal Council and the licences of the builder have also
expired on 31.12.2022. The case regarding the assets and
liabilities of the above said promoter is pending with the
NCLT. Certain information was also sought by the tribunal
from this office, which has been duly sent by the office. The
petitioners can approach NCLT with regard to the redressal
of their grievances. At present, nothing is required to be
done by this office regarding the grievances of the
petitioners.

10.8 Further, ADC/UA, SAS Nagar, vide memo dated

26.03.2025, submitted copies of the above mentioned
licences dated 22.07.2008 and 17.06.2013, to the
developer.

11. The petitioners filed IA No.06 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC for
preponing the date of hearing of the main petition.

12. The petitioner submitted a rejoinder to the reply submitted by

ADC/UD on dated 17.04.2025 and submitted as under:

12.1 On 15.04.2024, the Hon'ble National Company law

Tribunal, New Delhi, while hearing the insolvency
proceedings had appointed CIRP to look after the interest
of the corporate Debtor who had advanced financial
assistance to the developer in terms of loans. It is further
submitted that after the appointment of CIRP, the
moratorium has been made applicable on the property i.e.

26
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

land, building, assets etc. of the developer i.e. JTPL city or

which is in the name of directors of the company but not the
residents who have bought property which is in their name
as owners. The property includes flats, independent houses
and plots of the residents/applicants who have filed the
present petition for issuing of directions to PSPCL to issue
domestic electricity connections. These assets and
properties do not fall within the ambit of the moratorium and
hence they cannot be deprived of the domestic electricity
connection on the pretext of NCLT proceedings which are
still pending with the New Delhi Bench.

12.2 In the case of Alpha & Omega Diagnostics (India) Ltd. V/s.
Asset Reconstruction Company of India Ltd & others (2017)
the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal,
New Delhi has observed that:

7. These are recognized canons of interpretation.

Language of the Statute should be read as it existed.
This is a trite law that no word can be added or
substituted or deleted from the enacted Code duly
legislated. Every word is to be read and interpreted as
it exists in the statute with the natural meaning
attached to the word. Rather in this Section the
language is so simple that there is no scope even to
supply 'casus omissus'. I hasten to add that the
doctrine of 'Noscitur a Sociis' is somewhat applicable
that the associated words take their meaning from one
another so that common sense meaning coupled
together in their cognate sense be interpreted. As a
result, "its" denotes the property owned by the
Corporate Debtor. The property not owned by the
Corporate Debtor do not fall within the ambits of the

27
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

Moratorium. Even Section 10 is confined to the Book of

the Accounts of the Corporate Debtor, due to the
reason that Section 10(3) has specified that the
Corporate Applicant shall furnish "its" Books of
Accounts. This Bench has no legislative authority to
expand the meaning of the term, "its" even under the
umbrella of 'Ejusdem generis'.
8. The outcome of this discussion is that the Moratorium
shall prohibit the action against the properties reflected
in the Balance Sheet of the Corporate Debtor. The
Moratorium has no application on the properties
beyond the ownership of the Corporate Debtor. For the
sake of completeness, it is worth to refer that the
provisions of The Securitization and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement f Securities Interest
Act, 2002 (the SARFAESI Act) may of be having
different criteria for enforcement of recovery of
outstanding debt, which is not the subject matter of this
Bench. Before I past with it is necessary to clarify my
humble view that the SARFAESI Act may come within
the ambits of Moratorium if an action is to foreclose or
to recover or to create any interest in respect of the
property belonged to or owned by a Corporate Debtor,
otherwise not."
In light of the above observation, PSPCL could not refuse
the domestic electricity connections to the applicants on the
pretext that there is a moratorium period and hence the
present petition is not maintainable.

12.3 There are exceptions to the moratorium under Section 14

of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 which is
reproduced below for the kind perusal of the Hon'ble
Commission;

Section 14: Moratorium.

28
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

14. (1) Subject to provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3),

on the insolvency commencement date, the
Adjudicating Authority shall by order declare
moratorium for prohibiting all of the following,
namely-
(a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending
suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor
including execution of any judgment, decree or
order in any court of law, tribunal, arbitration panel
or other authority;
(b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of
by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal
right or beneficial interest therein;
(c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any
security interest created by the corporate debtor in
respect of its property including any action under the
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002;
(d) the recovery of any property by an owner or less or
where such property is occupied by or in the
possession of 13 the corporate debtor.
[Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, it is
hereby clarified that notwithstanding anything
contained in any other law for the time being in force, a
license, permit, registration, quota, concession,
clearances or a similar grant or right given by the
Central Government, State Government, local
authority, sectoral regulator or any other authority
constituted under any other law for the time being in
force, shall not be suspended or terminated on the
grounds of insolvency, subject to the condition that

29
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

there is no default in payment of current dues arising

for the use or continuation of the license, permit,
registration, quota, concession, clearances or a similar
grant or right during the moratorium. period;]

(2) The supply of essential goods or services to the

corporate debtor, as may be specified, shall not be
terminated or suspended or interrupted during the
moratorium period.

[(2A) Where the interim resolution professional or resolution

professional, as the case may be, considers the supply of
goods or services critical to protect and preserve the
value of the corporate debtor and manage the operations
of such corporate debtor as a going concern, then the
supply of such goods or services shall not be terminated,
suspended or interrupted during the period of
moratorium, except where such corporate debtor has not
paid dues arising from such supply during the moratorium
period or in such circumstances as may be specified.)
2
[(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to
3
[(a) such transactions, agreements or other arrangements
as may be notified4 by the Central Government in
consultation with any financial sector regulator or any other
authority;)

(b) a surety in a contract of guarantee to a corporate

debtor.]

(4) The order of moratorium shall have effect from the date
of such order till the completion of the corporate insolvency
30
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

resolution process:

Provided that where at any time during the corporate

insolvency resolution process period, if the Adjudicating
Authority approves the resolution plan under sub-section
(1) of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of
corporate debtor under section 33, the moratorium shall
cease to have effect from the date of such approval or
liquidation order, as the case may be. The bare perusal of
above section demonstrates that the supply of electricity
falls within the ambit of basic amenities and shall not be
denied due to the continuation of NCLT pending
proceedings specially when the properties of the resident or
applicant's property do not fall within the ambit of the
developer’s property.

12.4 PSPCL has already submitted its claim before the CIRP,
the resolution professional, and denying the electricity
connections to the applicants on the pretext that claim
amount has not been paid by the developer, is wrong and
against the spirit of natural justice. The residents/applicants
have bought the houses or flats in the JTPL City after
paying the registration charges to the Kharar Municipal
Corporation and have got the maps passed before initiating
construction of their houses. Hence denying the basic
necessity of domestic electricity supply is nothing more
than harassment being caused by the department of the
state government who is the only electricity supplier in the
state of Punjab. PSPCL was adamant on not releasing the
domestic electricity connections to the applicants which has
31
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

resulted in the infringement of their fundamental rights.

12.5 The petitioners denied the claim of the office of ADC/(UD)

about the petition not being related to them. It is an
admitted fact that they had provided the licence to the
developer to develop the society. After obtaining the license
from them, the developer proceeded ahead with the
development of the colony namely JTPL Township at
Sector 115, Kharar, Mohali.

The licences were granted by the then Deputy Director

local bodies, Patiala. It is denied that the learned ADC
(Urban Development) has nothing to do with it, as they are
the official licencing authority who look after the interest of
the residents of the colonies. Earlier the licences to develop
a private township were issued by the Deputy Director,
Local Bodies, Patiala, which has later on been relegated to
the ADC (Urban Development) SAS, Nagar.

12.6 It is denied that the promoter has not installed the electric
installations and supply of electricity to the colony/
residents whereas PSPCL in its reply had itself admitted
that the LD system has been erected by the developer in
the extended pocket of the colony but the NOC for the
same has not being obtained by the developer. So, the
existing LD system cannot be taken for releasing
permanent connections in the extended portion of colony
for which the developer has not taken an NOC. It is apt to
mention here that it is the responsibility of the licencing
authority to first issue an NOC to the developer and only

32
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

after that the developer can initiate construction/selling

/buying in the area for which the licence/NOC has been
issued. In the present case, however, construction activities
have never been stopped and flats/plots have been sold to
the innocent inhabitants and buyers who are not aware of
the issue regarding the renewal of the NOC and the
technicalities involved in the issuance of the NOC to the
developer. Even the Registration authority Kharar is
continuing to register plots and flats and the EO, Kharar is
also accepting files for clearing maps for construction of the
houses without consideration of the fact that the NOC has
not been issued for developing the extended pocket of the
JTPL township. In the present case, the resident/
applicants are suffering without any reason due to a
procedural lag of the official respondents. The
residents/applicants who have temporary electricity meters
are also suffering by paying commercial charges for using
the electricity for domestic purpose.

12.7 The show cause notice has been issued on 01.10.2024 by

the licencing authority when the residents complained
about the lack of electric infrastructure. At the very onset,
the CIRP has been appointed by Hon'ble NCLT, New Delhi
vide order dated 15.04.2024. The licence of the developer
expired and in his letter to the Additional Superintending
Engineer, PSPCL, Kharar, it was stated by the ADC (urban
development) that at present the government has no rules
to extend the licence which was issued 7 years ago. This
means that the licence of the developer i.e. M/s JTPL

33
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

Township Pvt. Limited expired much before the

appointment of the resolution professional. The licence was
issued on 17.06.2013, which means it has expired in the
year 2022 i.e. on 31.12.2022, which demonstrates the fact
that there is a mistake on the part of the licencing authority
since the licence has not been cancelled for the last 4
years. The official respondents issued a show cause notice
only when the inhabitants of the township paid regular visits
to the office ADC/UD, for the redressal of their greviance. It
is a dereliction of duty on their part that a developer whose
licence had expired is continuing to develop the township
without getting his licence renewed.

12.8 Though the case is pending before the NCLT Tribunal, New
Delhi, it is denied that the petitioners could approach the
NCLT tribunal with regard to the redressal of their
grievances. The true fact is that the property of the
petitioners who have filed the present petition does not fall
within the ambit of the moratorium because the properties
of the petitioners are not the properties of the developer
anymore. The NCLT proceedings are concerned only with
the property of the developer and not the residents.

12.9 Accordingly, the petitioners pleaded for directions to

PSPCL to issue domestic electricity connections without
causing any further delay, in the interest of justice.

13. During the hearing on 23.04.2025, the Commission observed

that vide Order dated 19.02.2025, M/s JTPL Pvt. Ltd. was
granted one last opportunity to file its reply. M/s JTPL has

34
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

neither appeared nor has filed any reply. Accordingly, it was

decided to proceed ex-parte against JTPL. Petitioners also filed
their written arguments reiterating similar submissions as
already stated in the petition and subsequent rejoinders. After
hearing the parties, the order was reserved.

14. Commission’s Finding and Order

14.1 The brief facts emerging from the submissions made by

the petitioners and the respondents are that the licensing
authority, under the provisions of the Punjab Apartment
and Property Regulation Act, 1995 (in short PAPR Act,
1995) granted license dated 22.07.2008 to the developer-
M/s.JTPL Township Private Limited (in short, the
developer) for development of a residential/commercial
colony on land measuring 69.40 acres. Subsequently,
another license, dated 17.06.2013, was issued for land
measuring 9.97 acres.

14.2 Further, the NOC to the developer for their 69.40 acres
project was issued by PSPCL on 19.12.2008. The
developer revised their lay out plan from 69.40 acre to
50.9 acre and accordingly, a revised NOC was issued by
PSPCL on 22.02.2013. For this pocket of 50.9 acres, the
partial load of 700 kW was got released by the developer
as per the approval accorded by PSPCL on 11.05.2013
after taking a bank guarantee for the remaining LD works.
Thereafter, regular electricity connections are being
released in this pocket of 50.9 acres.

14.3 Subsequently, the developer revised its lay out plan from

35
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

50.9 acres to 77.0325 acres and submitted an online

application for a revised NOC. While the said application
was pending for want of completion of requisite
documents, proceedings under the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 commenced against the
developer. Presently, the case is pending with the NCLT
Bench, Delhi. Thus, the present status can be
summarised as that the required NOC has been obtained
for the 50.90 acre pocket while for the remaining area, the
developer was yet to obtain the NOC from the distribution
licensee i.e., PSPCL. The petitioners who have
approached this Commission for release of electricity
connections are from this remaining area for which the
NOC was yet to be issued by PSPCL.

14.4 The petitioners have repeatedly emphasised on the

universal service obligation of the distribution licensee to
provide electricity connections under Section 43 of the
Indian Electricity Act. In this context, it would be
instructive to refer to an Order dated 19.05.2023 passed
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2109-
2110 of 2004 wherein it was held that the duty to supply
electricity under Section 43 of the Electricity Act, 2003 Act
is not absolute and is subject to such charges and
compliances stipulated by the Electric Utilities as part of
the application for supply of electricity. It was further held
that under Section 50 of the Act, the State Commission is
authorized to notify the Electric Supply Code. Use of
expressions such as recovery of charges, disconnection/

36
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

reconnection etc indicate that the scope of regulatory

powers of the State Commission is wide enough to govern
all matters relating to the Supply of electricity in the
premises of an applicant. The relevant portion of the order
is reproduced below:

“I. Universal Service Obligation is not absolute

30. The relevant portion of Section 43 reads as follows:
“43. Duty to supply on request – (1) Save as
otherwise provided in this Act, every
distribution licensee, shall, on an
application by the owner or occupier of any
premises, give supply of electricity to such
premises, within one month after receipt of
the application requiring such supply:
***
Explanation – For the purposes of this subsection,
“application” means application complete in all respects
in the appropriate form, as required by the distribution
licensee, along with the documents showing payment of
necessary charges and other compliances.
(2) It shall be the duty of every distribution licensee to
provide, if required, electric plant or electric line for
giving electric supply to the premises specified in sub-
section (1):
Provided that no person shall be entitled to demand, or
to continue to receive, from a licensee a supply of
electricity for any premises having a separate supply
unless he has agreed with the licensee to pay to him
such price as determined by the Appropriate
Commission.”
(emphasis supplied)
31. According to Section 43, the distribution licensee is
obligated to supply electricity to the premises of an
owner or occupier within a month of the receipt of an
application requiring such supply. The provision casts a
duty on the distribution licensee to supply electricity to

37
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

the owner or occupier’s premises. Correspondingly, the

owner or occupier of the premises has a right to apply
for and obtain electric supply from the distribution
licensee. Both the right and the corresponding duty are
imposed by the statute. The owner or occupier of the
premises has to submit an application to avail of the
supply of electricity.
32. In Brihanmumbai Electric Supply & Transport
Undertaking v. Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory
Commission, a two-judge Bench of this Court observed
that the obligation of the distribution licensee to supply
electricity to premises will begin after the owner or
occupier of such premises submits a completed
application. The explanation to Section 43 clarifies that
the application must be complete in all respects along
with the necessary documents showing payment of
“necessary charges” and other compliances, as
required by the distribution licensee. Thus, under
Section 43, the distribution licensee is obligated to
supply electricity to the premises of an owner or
occupier, provided that the owner or occupier pays all
charges and complies with all conditions stipulated by
the distribution licensee. Section 43 begins with the
words “Save as otherwise provided in this Act”. Hence,
the operation of Section 43 will also be subject to
compliance with the other provisions of the 2003 Act.
33. Section 45 lays down the manner of computation of the
price to be charged by the distribution licensee for
supply of electricity under Section 43. It provides that a
distribution licensee may fix charges for supply of
electricity in accordance with the tariffs fixed from time
to time in accordance with the methods and principles
specified by the concerned State Commission. Under
Section 46, a distribution licensee is empowered to
charge from any person who seeks supply of electricity
any expenses reasonably incurred in providing any
electric line or electric plant used for the purpose of
giving electricity. Section 47 empowers the distribution
licensee to seek a reasonable security from any person
38
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

who requires supply under Section 43. It further

provides that the distribution licensee can refuse to
supply electricity to any person who fails to give the
security deposit. The provision is extracted below:
“47. Power to require security –
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a
distribution licensee may require any person, who
requires a supply of electricity in pursuance of
section 43, to give him reasonable security, as
may be determined by regulations, for the
payment to him of all monies which may become
due to him –
(a) in respect of the electricity supplied to such
person; or
(b) where any electricity line or electrical plant or
electric meter is to be provided for supplying
electricity to such person, in respect of the
provision of such line or plant or meter,
And if that person fails to give such security,
the distribution licensee may, if he thinks fit,
refuse to give the supply of electricity or to
provide the line or plant or meter for the
period during which the failure continues.”
(emphasis supplied)
34. Section 47 indicates that a distribution licensee can
refuse to supply electricity under Section 43 if the
applicant fails to furnish the requisite security. Under
Section 48, a distribution licensee may require the
applicant, who requires a supply of electricity in
pursuance of Section 43, to accept (i) any restrictions
which may be imposed for the purpose of enabling the
distribution licensee to comply with the regulations
made under Section 53; and (ii) any terms restricting
any liability of the distribution licensee for economic loss
resulting from negligence of the person to whom
electricity is supplied. Thus, it is implicit that the
distribution licensee may refuse electricity supply to the

39
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

applicant until they accept such terms and restrictions

reasonably imposed by the distribution licensee
incidental to the statute.
35. Further, Section 50 empowers the State
Commission to specify an Electricity Supply Code
providing for recovery of electricity charges, among
other things. The Electric Utilities have urged that
the duty to supply electricity is subject to the
Electricity Supply Code specified under Section 50.
As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, an
applicant is required to submit a completed
application along with documents showing the
payment of necessary charges and other
compliances. The Electricity Supply Code can
stipulate such other compliances that an applicant
has to observe for getting the supply of electricity
under Section 43. Therefore, reading Section 43
along with Sections 45, 46, 47, 48, and 50, it
becomes evident that the right of an applicant to
seek supply of electricity under Section 43 is not
absolute. The right is subject to the payment of
charges, security deposit, as well as terms and
restrictions imposed by the distribution licensee.”
Thus, the right of the person to get electric supply
from the distribution licensee is not absolute and is
subject to the provisions of the Supply Code
Regulations framed by the Commission.

14.5 In this context, the provision of electricity connections to

the colonies developed under the By-laws of the State
Government was governed by Regulation 6.7 of Supply
Code, 2014 and now by Regulation 12 of Supply Code,
2024. As per the aforementioned regulations, the
electricity connections are to be released by the licensee
to the individual units inside the colonies, after the

40
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

developer takes an NOC from distribution licensee for the

LD system and after installing the same, hands over the
LD system to licensee. In this case, as mentioned above,
the NOC for the LD system for the remaining pocket of the
land was yet to be issued.

14.6 Another respondent in the case i.e. Additional Deputy

Commissioner (ADC)/Urban Development (UD), SAS
Nagar intimated that the above mentioned licenses have
since expired. Further, PSPCL has referred to the memo
no.4462/65 dated 07.06.2024 from the office of ADC/UD,
SAS Nagar conveying that there are no rules of the
government for extending the license which expired 7
years ago and hence the renewal of the above said
licensees cannot be considered at the moment. ADC/UD,
SAS Nagar had further submitted memo no.1763 dated
11.03.2025 stating that after the residents of the colony
represented about lack of basic amenities including
electric infrastructure, their office issued a show cause
notice dated 01.10.2024 to the developer for not providing
basic amenities including electric infrastructure as per the
terms of the license and sought a reply within 21 days
failing which action would be taken as per the PAPR Act,
1995 and the rules including cancellation of license as per
sub-section 14 of section 5 of the Act. However, a
response was received from the Resolution Professional
appointed by the NCLT vide email dated 21.10.2024 on
behalf of the developer that presently M/s. JTPL Private
Limited is undergoing the corporate insolvency resolution

41
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

process before the NCLT, New Delhi as per Order dated

15.04.2024. Since the management of the Corporate
Debtor stands suspended and Resolution Professional
stands appointed, no show cause notice can be issued to
the Corporate Debtor. Accordingly, no further action has
been taken by their office and PSPCL can proceed to
provide infrastructure in the colony under the rules in view
of hardships being faced by residents of the colony. On
the other hand, the petitioners have submitted that the
flats, independent houses and plots in the colony should
not fall in the ambit of the NCLT moratorium as they are
not the property of the developer anymore and rather
have been registered in their name.

14.7 At this stage, the Commission would not like to go into the
technicalities of the corporate insolvency resolution
process and the associated moratorium and other related
issues. Nonetheless, the Commission has been inundated
with the petitions from aggrieved residents/plot holders
from such colonies developed under the By-laws of the
State Government wherein the developer has either not
taken an NOC from PSPCL or has not fulfilled the
conditions of the NOC/not developed the LD system. The
Commission appreciates that the individuals spend their
lifelong savings to purchase a dwelling unit, reposing faith
in the licensing authority as well as the developer, but
many a time, are left in the lurch due to developers not
meeting their obligations and the licencing authorities or
PSPCL not properly enforcing the conditions of the

42
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

licence/NOC. To mitigate the hardship of such individuals,

the Commission has made the provision for release of
electricity connection in the abandoned colonies as per
Regulation 16 of Supply Code, 2024 which is reproduced
below:

16. RELEASE OF CONNECTIONS IN ABANDONED

COLONIES
“In case a promoter has not obtained the NOC from the
distribution licensee or has not fulfilled the conditions of the
NOC issued by the distribution licensee such as an
incomplete LD system or has not deposited the BG or the
connectivity charges etc, within the stipulated time and in
the manner as specified in these regulations, it shall be
sufficient grounds to initiate action to get the license of such
promoter suspended or cancelled from the licensing
authority as per the provisions of the PAPR Act, 1995. The
distribution licensee shall report all cases of violation by the
promoters of the provisions of PAPRA or conditions of
license or NOC issued by the distribution licensee to the
competent authority as provided in PAPRA. In case the
competent authority does not act against the promoter or
initiate action under PAPRA within 3 months, the
distribution licensee shall take up the matter with the
competent court or the authority as per law to get
necessary directions to the competent authority to proceed
against the developer and initiate further action as per
PAPRA. Once the license of a developer is suspended or
cancelled by the licensing authority as per the PAPR Act,
such colony shall be treated as an abandoned colony and
the release of connections in such colonies, shall be
governed as under:
(1) In case, the distribution licensee has accepted a BG at
the time of allowing connectivity to a colony with
incomplete LD system as per the provisions of these
regulations then the distribution licensee shall be
responsible to complete the remaining LD system and
release connections to the residents by recovery of SCC
43
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

from the residents. Since the distribution licensee is

obligated to obtain a BG before allowing connectivity to
a partially completed LD system, thus, in case partial
connectivity has been released by the distribution
licensee without getting a BG as per regulations then
the remaining LD system shall be completed by the
distribution licensee and connections shall be released
by recovering full Service Connection Charges as
approved by the Commission. Any financial loss may be
recovered by PSPCL from the delinquent
officials/officers as per law.
(2) The layout plan along with total estimated load of the
colony as per the present loading norms shall be worked
out along with the tentative estimated cost of laying the
LD System for the colony as per the norms and the
rates approved by the distribution licensee for preparing
estimates for release of GSC connections and the
connectivity charges including system loading charges
as per Regulation 12(3) of this Code. After estimating
the Service Connection Charges (SCC), as approved by
the Commission, which will be recoverable from the
residents against the estimated load, the balance
amount after deducting SCC from the estimated cost
worked out above shall be intimated to the Licensing
Authority. In case, the distribution licensee has accepted
a BG from the promoter at the time of issue of NOC as
per the provisions of Supply Code, the same may be en-
cashed by the distribution licensee and this amount shall
also be deducted from the balance amount
communicated to the competent authority. As per the
provisions of PAPRA, the Licensing Authorities may get
the work of erection of LD System carried out at its level
and recover any additional expenditure from the
promoter and the allottees as per the provisions of
PAPRA. Alternatively the Licensing Authority may get
this work completed from PSPCL by depositing the
amount worked out above.
(3) In case the RWA of such a colony opts to get the work
of electrical system executed, the terms and conditions
44
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

as at sub-regulation (2) above shall be applicable in that

case also.
(4) During the period the issue is being settled by the
distribution licensee with the licensing authority or RWA,
the residents may seek electric connection from the
distribution licensee by paying the ‘Development
Charges’ @ Rs. 3000 per kW or Rs. 2850/kVA on
normative basis or as may be decided by the
Commission from time to time along with normal service
connection charges applicable for the category of the
consumer as approved by the Commission in the cost
data. In case of recovery of expenses from either the
promoter or the licensing Authority as per sub-regulation
(2) above, the development charges deposited by the
residents shall be refunded through energy bills. The
distribution licensee shall erect the distribution system
only for the providing supply to the residents who have
deposited the above charges and not complete LD
system of the colony.”
14.8 A perusal of the above mentioned regulation indicates that
once the license of a developer is suspended or cancelled
by the licensing authority as per the PAPR Act, such
colony shall be treated as an abandoned colony and
release of electricity connections shall be governed as per
the above provisions in the said regulation. In this case,
though the license has not been suspended or cancelled,
yet the Commission cannot lose sight of the peculiar
position that the licenses already stands expired and due
to the proceedings under the IBC, even the show cause
notice issued by the licensing authority, which could
further have led to cancellation of the license, has not
been made effective as intimated by the ADC/UD, SAS
Nagar. Accordingly, to address the grievances of the

45
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

petitioners in this case, the Commission, exercising its

powers under Regulation 67-‘Power to Remove
Difficulties’ of the Supply Code, 2024 directs PSPCL that
the necessary action to provide electricity connections in
the area of the colony beyond 50.90 acre for which the
licenses were issued but NOC was yet to be obtained
from PSPCL, be taken as per Regulation 16 of Supply
Code, 2024 by treating it as an abandoned colony, since
in practical terms, it has been effectively rendered as
such.

14.9 It has also been submitted that PSPCL has filed a claim in
respect of this colony before the NCLT. In case of
recovery of such claim in respect of the LD system, the
same shall also be accounted for as per Regulation 16(4)
of the Supply Code, 2024 for refunding development
charges to the residents at the appropriate time. Further,
the tentative cost of laying the LD system for the colony
as per Regulation 16(2) shall be worked out after
accounting for the LD system already installed by the
developer in the colony. At the same time, the
Commission expresses strong displeasure at the
negligence of PSPCL for its failure to encash the bank
guarantee for the LD system and allowing it to lapse.
PSPCL may take appropriate action against such
negligent officials.

14.10 The Commission further takes note of the abject failure of

the licensing authority to monitor the progress/completion
of development works vis-à-vis with the terms and
46
 Petition No.27 of 2024
alongwith IA No.05 of 2024
IA No.06 of 2025

conditions and validity of the licence, and to take timely

corrective action against the developer. Accordingly, the
Commission would like to issue an advisory to the
licensing authority to ensure adequate oversight of the
development works undertaken by the developers in the
licensed colonies under their jurisdiction, to prevent
harassment to the purchasers. In this case also, the
licensing authority issued the show cause notice to the
developer only in the year 2024, a good 11 years after the
issue of license dated 17.06.2013, that too, only after the
residents of the colony approached them for representing
against the lack of basic amenities including the electricity
infrastructure in the colony. To prevent such recurrence,
adequate monitoring mechanism must be created by the
licensing authorities to ensure compliance by the
developers with the conditions of license including inter
alia, the development of electricity infrastructure in the
licensed colonies.

The petition is accordingly disposed of with the above

directions.

Sd/- Sd/-
(Paramjeet Singh) (Viswajeet Khanna)
Member Chairperson

Chandigarh
Dated: 26.05.2025

47