BALWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is already a case in respect of the same subject matter in which notice has been issued in CWP No.13886 of 2014. I direct the matter to be suo motu advanced today in spite of the fact that the case has been fixed for hearing on 04.11.2014. Since the counsel for the petitioner is also representing the said petition, with his consent the writ petition in CWP No.13886 of 2014 is also being taken up along with other connected cases.

(2.) In all the petitions, the contention is that stone crushers which are being operated are sought to be brought under a new decision of the authorities under the Power Corporation threatening disconnection of electricity if the stone crushers are operated without licences and without registration under the Mining Officer, Pathankot. The policy guideline would set forth through Clause 7 that the sections of Punjab Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the relevant rules are applicable. The counsel would himself refer me to the relevant provision that contemplates an action against a person who has a stone crusher without licence could be liable for a penalty which may extend to two years and with fine. The argument is that, if at all, the respective petitioners could be only prosecuted for the offences and imposed with penalties and no action could be taken for withdrawing electricity connection.

(3.) Electricity connection which is issued for industries is for a commercial purpose. A commercial purpose ought to conform to the regulatory laws. The provision for grant of electricity cannot be treated in isolation. The Electricity Board cannot be compelled to do any act which would be an offence elsewhere under some other enactment. If continuance of a stone crusher without a licence will constitute an offence under the Act of 1957 and relevant Rules, supply of electricity for such stone crusher would also be impermissible.