CWP/18127/2026 on 9 October 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.18127 of 2026

Date of Decision: 09.10.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ M/s Sunny Gramin Udyog

……...Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. & Ors.

…....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? Yes.

For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.

For the respondent: Ms. Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Harshita Dogra, Advocate.

___________________________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Precisely, the case of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Surinder Saklani, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that on account of the non-availability of Electricity Ombudsman, representation filed by the petitioner under Regulation 28(1)(b) of the Himachal Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum and Ombudsman) Regulations, 2024, challenging order dated 06.08.2026 passed by the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum at Kasumpti, Shimla, in Complaint No. 3241/202512/34, is not being decided, as a consequence thereof, respondent-Electricity Board has issued a defaulter notice dated 14.09.2026 (Annexure P-3), calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 19,26,141/- within a period of 15 days, failing which the electricity connection shall be disconnected.

2. Having regard to the nature of the prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondent-Electricity Board, who is otherwise represented by Ms. Harshita Dogra, Advocate.

3. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record by the respective parties, are that on 10.12.2025, respondent-Electricity Board issued notice with regard the deposit of outstanding dues and directed the petitioner to deposit the outstanding amount within 15 days, failing which electricity connection would be disconnected.

4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid notice, petitioner filed a complaint before the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, which, vide order dated 27.12.2025, stayed the notice dated 10.12.2025, subject to the deposit of one-third of the total disputed amount in the office of the Jwali Sub-Division, HPSEB, Jwali, District Kangra. Subsequently, vide order dated 06.08.2026, Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid order passed by the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, petitioner filed a representation before the Electricity Ombudsman under Regulation 28(1)(b) of the Himachal Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission

(Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum and Ombudsman) Regulations, 2013, but since the post of Electricity Ombudsman is presently lying vacant, appeal filed by the petitioner could not be adjudicated. In the meantime, respondent-Electricity Board issued a defaulter notice dated 14.09.2026 (Annexure P-3), thereby calling upon the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 19,26,141/- against SAP Bill No. 110001323111 within a period of 15 days, failing which electricity connection would be disconnected.

6. Since it is not in dispute that petitioner has preferred statutory appeal before Electricity Ombudsman and the same is yet to be adjudicated, this Court, keeping in view petitioner's threat perception of respondent-board’s, proceeding ahead by executing defaulter notice dated 14.09.2026 before listing of the appeal, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid defaulter notice dated 14.09.2026 until the appeal pending before the Electricity Ombudsman is decided, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed amount.

7. Needless to say, instant order has been passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The appellate authority shall decide the appeal filed by the petitioner in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made in the instant order.

8. It is further clarified that petitioner shall continue to pay the monthly Energy bills.

9. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.

October 09, 2026

(Sandeep Sharma), (sunil)

Judge