RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,J. - (1.) The question involved in this writ petition is as to whether the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services) (for short, 'Adalat') has the jurisdiction under Section 22-C(8) of the Legal Services Authorities, Act 1987 (for short, 'the Act, 1987) to adjudicate upon a notice issued under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, 'the Act, 2003')?
(2.) The facts are not in dispute as respondent No. 2 was served with a notice issued under Section 126 of the Act, 2003 vide Memo No. 603 dated
(3.) 04.2013, for unauthorized consumption of the electricity. Respondent No. 2 challenged that notice by way of an application filed under Section 22-C of the Act, 1987 before the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Panchkula (Camp District Court Complex Jagadhri) which has been allowed vide order dated 12.05.2015 (Annexure P-5). Hence, the present petition has been filed. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Adalat has erred in exercising its jurisdiction in adjudicating upon the lis between the parties, which was otherwise pre-mature at that stage, as the application was filed by respondent No. 2 under Section 22- C of the Act, 1987 against the provisional assessment of electricity charges, conveyed to him under Section 126 (2) of the Act, 2003. It is submitted that a complete scheme is provided in Chapter XII of the Act, 2003 in regard to assessment of unauthorized consumption of electricity, in which the authorities under the Act shall first provisionally assess the electricity charges payable and then serve upon a provisional assessment order which can be challenged by the said person by filing objections and those objections are to be decided after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing and then in case, the electricity charges are still to be recovered then final order has to be passed. It is further submitted that the said final order is further appealable under Section 127 of the Act, 2003 and as such, the jurisdiction of the Adalat was ousted.;