JUDGMENT

G.S. Singhvi, J.—

1. Leave granted.

2. This is an appeal for setting aside order dated 30.7.2008 passed by the Division Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court whereby it dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order of Ombudsman, Electricity, Punjab (hereinafter described as “the Ombudsman”) who, in turn, reversed the decision of the Disputes Settlement Authority (for short, “the DSA”) and directed refund of the amount recovered from the respondent towards Advance Consumption Deposit (ACD), service connection charges and load surcharge.

3. The respondent, who owns a shopping complex at Mata Rani Chowk, AC Market, Ludhiana submitted application dated 23.5.1995 to the competent authority of the appellant for sanction of NRS connection with a load of 2548 KW and deposited ACD amounting to Rs.5,25,600/-. The Engineer-in-Chief/Commercial Sales Director, Punjab State Electricity Board sanctioned registration of the application of the respondent subject to the condition that connection would be released only after shifting of 8 MVA load from 66 KV sub station, G.T. Road, Ludhiana to the proposed 66 KV sub station, Feroze Gandhi Market and Transport Nagar, Ludhiana. However, due to non-availability of the transformer, steps for shifting 8 MVA load from 66 KV sub station, G.T. Road, Ludhiana, could not be taken. After some time, the respondent applied for release of connection with 1500 KW from the existing system. The request of the respondent was accepted by the Chief Engineer concerned and accordingly a connection was released in favour of the respondent with effect from 25.3.1996. On 11.5.1999, new transformer was installed at 66 KV sub station, G.T. Road, Ludhiana. Thereafter, Memo dated 11.8.1999 was issued to the respondent to give consent for release of the balance load. The latter submitted consent letter dated 1.9.1999 with a stipulation that six months’ period may be allowed for building up the balance load. On being asked by the Senior Executive Engineer, the respondent submitted an affidavit dated 16.10.2000 for release of the balance load.

4. Since, the respondent failed to avail the balance load within six months, the competent authority of the appellant forfeited the ACD on the premise that the application made by the applicant had lapsed. This was followed by notice dated 13.12.2001 vide which the respondent was informed that it can submit fresh A&A form for availing the balance load. To the same effect, reminder dated 23.5.2002 was also issued to the respondent. However, the representative of the respondent declined to submit fresh A&A form by contending that the same is not applicable to NRS connection.

5. The electricity connection installed in the premises of the respondent was checked on 27.8.2004 by a team of officers of the Board which found that as against the sanctioned load of 1500 KW, the respondent was using total load of 1981.637 KW. Upon receipt of the report of the checking team, demand notice dated 25.1.2005 was issued to the respondent requiring it to deposit Rs.15,41,492/- which included Rs. 3,37,400/- as ACD, Rs.4,81,637/- as service connection charges and Rs.7,22,455/- as load surcharge.

6. The respondent challenged the aforesaid notice by filing a petition before the DSA, which was dismissed vide order dated 20.2.2006. The operative portion of that order reads as under:

“Keeping in view the petition, reply, rejoinder, evidence adduced, written arguments and oral discussion DSA concluded that charging of load surcharge for 432 KW load is correct. As per SR No.35.1.2, the petitioner did not apply for any extension in time after the expiry of six months for building up of his load, in such cases where the consumer does not come up with the request for extension in time beyond six months for building up of balance load/demand, the load/demand not availed shall be deemed to have elapsed. In this case above mentioned regulation is applicable for calculating the penalty. Thus