Adjudicatory power requires a properly constituted Commission; orders made without a Judicial Member were held void for want of jurisdiction.

Exercise of adjudicatory power under Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 requires a properly constituted Commission with a member having knowledge of law; orders passed when no Judicial Member was available were treated as coram non judice and void for want of jurisdiction. The objection was not cured by the petitioner's participation or delay because jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver, estoppel or acquiescence. The writ petition succeeded, the impugned Commission orders were quashed, and the matter was left open for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the orders referring the dispute to arbitration and the subsequent review order were without jurisdiction for want of a Judicial Member in the Commission; (ii) whether the challenge was barred by waiver, estoppel, acquiescence or delay.

Issue (i): whether the orders referring the dispute to arbitration and the subsequent review order were without jurisdiction for want of a Judicial Member in the Commission.

Analysis: The power exercised under Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 was held to be adjudicatory in nature. On that footing, the absence of a member having knowledge of law rendered the Commission incapable of validly exercising that function. The impugned orders, passed when no Judicial Member was available, were therefore treated as suffering from coram non judice and jurisdictional vice.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.

Issue (ii): whether the challenge was barred by waiver, estoppel, acquiescence or delay.

Analysis: Jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver or acquiescence. Since the objection went to the root of the Commission's competence, the earlier participation of the petitioner and the delay in mounting the challenge did not cure the defect or bar the petition.

Conclusion: The challenge was not barred by waiver, estoppel, acquiescence or delay.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the impugned Commission orders were quashed, and the matter was left open for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Exercise of the adjudicatory power under Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 requires a Commission properly constituted with a member having knowledge of law, and an order passed without such composition is void for want of jurisdiction.

---