Mr. Justice S.S. Sandhawalia, President—The true purpose and scope of Section 27 of the Act is the crucial issue herein. The ancillary question is whether total compliance with the substantive order of the redressal agency would be an extenuating factor for modifying the rigour of a penal order passed under Section 27 of the Act. These significant issues arise out of this set of two connected revision petitions directed against the same order of the District Forum.

2. The facts are not in serious dispute. Pirthi Singh had preferred a complaint before the District Forum, Kaithal on the 6th of June, 1992 against the petitioner Haryana Electricity Board (here in after called the Board). The said complaint was allowed on the 30th of September, 1992 with the direction that the Board through its Sub Divisional Officer, Pundri shall release the electric connection to the tubewell of the complainant against the earlier test reports within three weeks of the order. Both the Board and the complainant preferred separate First Appeals Nos. 346 of 1992 and 352 of 1992, respectively against the said order. This Commission by its order dated the 15th of December, 1992, rejected the First Appe