Suspension Issue: Chief engineer Ropar Thermal Plant to appeal PSPCL, CMD will not be part of decision-High Court

900

Suspension Issue: Chief engineer Ropar Thermal Plant to appeal PSPCL, CMD will not be part of decision-High Court

Kanwar Inder Singh/ royalpatiala.in News/ November 14,2025

Punjab and Haryana High Court while disposing off a petition filed by Chief Engineer Ropar thermal plant,  has directed the  Board of Directors of the PSPCL to consider the appeal  to be filed by the petitioner   and decide in accordance with law by passing a speaking order preferably  within a period of two months. Since the suspension order was passed by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director he will not be associated with the decision of the appeal. The chief engineer has been given one week to appeal to the board  for a decision.

Chief Engineer Ropar thermal made the submission that he  has an unblemished career of over 34 years. The  CMD PSPCL is also not the competent authority  for suspending a chief engineer. The  order of November 1 is in violation of the procedure prescribed and  has been passed in a predetermined manner . Further,  he is not responsible for the price fixation and purchase of fuel and the allegations levelled against him are completely unfounded.

The petitioner chief engineer RTP  has stressed that fuel cost and consumption parameters of a sub critical unit such as Ropar thermal units  cannot be compared with parameters of a super critical unit which operates on superior technology hence suspension  order on the basis of fuel parameters  of  RTP  with supercritical units  is not justified.

PSPCL contended that Punishment and Appeal Regulations, 1971 provides an alternative remedy through an appeal against the order of suspension and,  thus he should prefer an appeal, the same would be decided within a period of one month.

Suspension Issue: Chief engineer Ropar Thermal Plant to appeal PSPCL, CMD will not be part of decision-High Court
pspcl

Meanwhile , PSEB Engineers Association  has opposed the manner in which suspension has been carried out. The technical data of the thermal plants has not been considered and the suspension appears to be based on flawed logic. Further questions have been raised over the legality of decisions of CMD, who has been appointed in violation of govts own regulations regarding qualification of CMD PSPCL.

Senior retired engineers have demanded an impartial inquiry regarding the illegal suspension.