Electricity Commission’s Decision on Tapping a Consumer’s Dedicated 66 kV Line Set Aside: Legal Member Required to Adjudicate Dispute, Rules Punjab and Haryana High Court

Case Name: M/s Ambey Industries v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Others

Date of Judgment: 21 September 2026

Citation: CWP-4732-2026.

Bench: Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya

Held: A Bench of the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission deciding a dispute must include a Chairperson or member from the legal field. The requirement applies to adjudicatory functions generally and is not confined to disputes between licensees and generating companies under Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003. Whether a proceeding is adjudicatory depends on what the Commission decides; filing it under the Commission’s Conduct of Business Regulations does not make it regulatory.

Summary: Ambey Industries challenged the Commission’s decision concerning PSPCL’s proposal to provide another company with an electricity connection by tapping a dedicated 66 kV line installed at Ambey Industries’ cost. The Commission had decided the dispute through its Chairperson and another member, both from technical or engineering backgrounds. The High Court held that deciding the parties’ competing claims over the line was an adjudicatory function. Applying State of Gujarat v. Utility Users’ Welfare Association, (2018) 6 SCC 21, it found that the Bench required a person from the legal field. The Court clarified that a Bench without a legal member may perform regulatory or advisory functions, but must include one when called upon to adjudicate a dispute arising from those functions.

Decision: The High Court set aside the Commission’s order as being without jurisdiction and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. It did not decide whether the proposed tapping of the 66 kV line was permissible.