JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. - The question which arises in the present batch of petitions is as to whether the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) is vested with the power to grant interim order in an application submitted under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1987')

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties are ad idem that as a common question of law arises for determination in the instant batch of petitions, hence, all the cases can be decided by a common order.

3. For the facility of reference, the facts have been extracted from CWP No.10661 of 2021 titled as 'UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ORS. VS. SHYAM LAL AND ANR.'

4. Briefly summarized, the facts of the instant case are that the Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (hereinafter to be referred as 'UHBVNL') has filed the instant writ petition raising a challenge to the order dated 22.12.2020 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Yamuna Nagar, whereby the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) has directed as under:-

'Power of attorney filed. But written statement not filed by respondents. Prayed for adjournment. Allowed. Be filed on 21.01.2021.

In the meanwhile, interim stay is granted till further orders and respondents are directed to restore the electricity connection to the petitioner bearing Account No.Y45BG440190X subject to depositing the 25% of the disputed amount and to pay the routine electricity bill regularly, till further orders."

5. As per the case set up in the petition, respondent No.1-applicant Shyam Lal is alleged to not paying the electricity bills and also not allowing the disconnection of the supply of electricity and instead has been resorting to obstructing and threatening the officials of the petitioner - distribution licensee with the help of the members of the Kissan Union. The electricity meter had been declared dead w.e.f. June 2018 and minimum charges were being ascertained and that even the said minimum charges were not being paid. On account of the huge arrears accumulated towards the consumption charges and accumulated charges thereupon, a bill for a sum of Rs.1,06,689/-was issued to him in the month of October, 2020 for the amount till then. The same was not deposited despite expiry of the last date prescribed therein. Accordingly, a demand notice dated 07.12.2020 (Annexure P-1/B) was served upon him for an amount of Rs.1,09,875/-. The connection was disconnected on 18.12.2020 for failure of respondent No.1 to deposit the outstanding arrears.

6. That instead of clearing the arrears of bill, respondent No.1-applicant moved an application (Annexure P-2) before the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Yamuna Nagar, for settlement with the petitioners and also submitted an application for grant of interim injunction alleging that the meter was defective and that he had made an application for settlement under One Time Settlement Scheme as per which he was required to deposit an amount of Rs.18,713/- and had deposited a sum of Rs.4,500/-on 31.01.2019. The balance amount could not be deposited on account of outbreak of Covid - 19 pandemic, however, he was still served with the energy consumption bill in the month of October 2020 and his request for correction of the same was not accepted.

7. Notice was issued by the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Yamuna Nagar, to the petitioner distribution licensee on 15.12.2020 requiring them to appear on 21.12.2020. The said summon was delivered on 17.12.2020. The case in question had been adjourned to 22.12.2020. The petitioner distribution licensee appeared before the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Yamuna Nagar, on 22.12.2020 and sought time to file reply however, while adjourning the case, the petitioner distribution licensee was directed to restore supply of electricity to the consumer subject to his depositing 25% of