IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 03.03.2025 M/s. Neelgiri Steels Pvt. Ltd. …Petitioner Versus PSPCL and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3.

Mr. H.S. Jugait, Advocate for respondent No.4.

****

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(ORAL)

1. Through the instant writ petition, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 19.07.2016 (Annexure P-8), passed by the respondent No.4- Ombudsman, Electricity Punjab, in appeal No.18 of 2016, and demand notice dated 07.10.2015 (Annexure P-2), through which the demand of Rs.8,34,633/-

was raised for a period of three years.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in order to throw challenge to the demand notice, and the order (supra), passed by the Ombudsman, submits that the demand notice has been raised in contravention of the Regulation 21.4 (g) (1) of the Supply Code, as well as in contravention of Regulation 104.1, 102.10 and 102.11 of Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2011 (for short ‘the ESIM’) , therefore, the said demand is totally illegal, whereas, if at all, there is an issue regar