The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a Land Acquisition Collector cannot adjudicate disputes relating to entitlement or apportionment of compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act). The Court ruled that where a bona fide dispute exists, the Collector is statutorily bound to refer the matter to the competent authority under Section 76 of the Act. A Division Bench comprising Justice Suvir Sehgal and Justice Vikas Suri passed the judgment in Gurdeep Singh and Another v. State of Punjab and Others (CWP-11737-2026). Background of the Case The dispute arose from agreements to sell executed in 2005 and 2006 between late Attar Singh and the petitioners concerning agricultural land situated in Punjab. Although a sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioners, subsequent litigation led to its cancellation by the High Court in contempt proceedings in 2008. However, while directing...
In a significant ruling for open access consumers and captive power users, the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) has clarified that exemption from Cross Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) available to captive consumers under Section 42(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not dependent upon the nature of open access availed. The Commission held that the exemption applies equally to captive power transactions undertaken through Short-Term Open Access (STOA), provided the captive status stands duly established. The order was passed in Petition No. 9 of 2026 filed by Jindal Stainless Limited against Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (DHBVNL) . Background of the Dispute Jindal Stainless approached HERC seeking clarification after DHBVNL rejected its request for exemption and refund of Cross Subsidy Surcharge on captive power procured from its captive generating arrangement through Short-Term Open Access. The company argued that once captive status is verified under applic...