$~26 to 40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 04.11.2025 + W.P.(C) 13017/2025 & CM APPL. 53259/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus VED PRAKASH ANR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 27 + W.P.(C) 14233/2025 & CM APPL. 58391/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus RAKESH SHARMA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: 28 + W.P.(C) 14703/2025 & CM APPL. 60366/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus REKHA JINDAL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 29 + W.P.(C) 12561/2025 & CM APPL. 51201/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus PUSHPA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 30 + W.P.(C) 12562/2025 & CM APPL. 51206/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus AJAY KUMAR JAIN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 31 + W.P.(C) 12568/2025 & CM APPL. 51224/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus MANJU PANDEY & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 32 + W.P.(C) 13285/2025 & CM APPL. 54510/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus ARVIND & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 33 + W.P.(C) 13290/2025 & CM APPPL. 54527/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus MANOJ KUMAR & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 34 + W.P.(C) 13295/2025 & CM APPPL. 54543/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus RUKSANA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 35 + W.P.(C) 13317/2025 & CM APPPL. 54623/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus NAZMEEN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 36 + W.P.(C) 13331/2025 & CM APPPL. 54653/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus TABASUM & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 37 + W.P.(C) 13349/2025 & CM APPPL. 54682/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus KARAN GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 38 + W.P.(C) 13368/2025 & CM APPPL. 54801/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus MOHD IRFAN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 39 + W.P.(C) 13374/2025 & CM APPPL. 54816/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus SHUBHAM GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: 40 + W.P.(C) 13404/2025 & CM APPPL. 54957/2025 BSES YAMUNA POWER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: versus MANJU SINGLA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Appearances For Petitioner: Mr. Moksh Arora, Adv. (Through VC) For Respondents: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Adv. for MCD in Item 28 Ms. Neem Vaid, SC for MCD in Item 34 & 38 Mr. Neeraj Kumar, ASC for R-2 in Item 26 Mr. Akhil Mittal, SC with Ms. Shriya Jaiswal, Adv. for MCD in Item 36 Mr. Sunil Goyal, ASC with Ms. Tanveet Kaur, Adv. for R-3 in Item 27 Mr. Anand Prakash, SC with Ms. Varsha Arya, Adv. for R-2 in Item 40 Mr. Siddhant Nath, SC with Mr. Bhavishya Makhija and Mr. Amaan Khan, Advs. for MCD in Item 39 Mr. Md. Qamar Ali, Mr. Imran Siddiqui and Ms. Priyanka, Advs. in Item 33 Ms. Arti Bansal, ASC with Ms. Shruti Goel, Adv. for MCD in Item 29 to 31. Ms. Meherunnisa Anand Jaitley, Adv. for R-2 in Item 35 & 37 Ms. Shivangi Kumar, Adv. for MCD in Item 23, 32 & 33 (Through VC) Mr. Pratyaksh Rajput and Mr. Jagdish Singh Rajput, Advs. for R-1 in Item 29 (Through VC) Mr. Vipin Dilawari, Adv. for R-1 in Item 32 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL): 1. The present writ petitions have been filed challenging the various orders, all dated 21st July, 2025 passed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (“CGRF”), whereby, the CGRF has passed the following directions: “xxx xxx xxx ” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the CGRF has erred in issuing these directions to the petitioner-BSES Yamuna Power Limited, to engage with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) and issue notices to the MCD at two stages. He submits that the said directions issued by the CGRF are beyond the statutory scheme and not sustainable in law. 3. Responding to the present writ petition, learned counsels appearing for the MCD submit that as regards the list of unauthorized construction, the said information is already available on the website of the MCD. Learned counsels appearing for the MCD submit that as and when such information is required by the petitioner, the same can be seen from the website of the MCD. 4. They further submit that the officials of the MCD are enjoined upon to render any assistance to the CGRF, as and when any information with regard to any status of the property is sought by the CGRF. They further submit that the CGRF is within its authority to call for record from the MCD, which the MCD shall provide, as and when such directions are issued to the MCD by the CGRF. 5. Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court, it is directed that the BSES Yamuna Power Limited, at the time of grant of any fresh electricity connection, shall assess the status of the property from the website of the MCD and take action accordingly. 6. As regards the status of any property, it is clarified that the CGRF is within its power to summon or call for any record from the MCD. 7. Accordingly, the orders dated 21st July, 2025 issued by the CGRF are modified to the extent that the petitioner, i.e., BSES Yamuna Power Limited is not required to issue notices at two stages to the MCD, as directed in the impugned orders. 8. With the aforesaid modification, the present writ petitions, along with the pending applications, stand disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J NOVEMBER 4, 2025/KR