The Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain complaints related to theft of energy under the Electricity Act, which are to be addressed by specific statutory forums.

JUDGMENT :

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.

1. Both these writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment being interrelated.

2. Brief facts in CWP-26339-2018, titled as 'Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Through XEN (OP) Division, Fatehabad Vs. Forum for Redressal of Consumer Grievance and others' are as under:-

3. The above case raises a challenge to the order dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as 'CGRF') whereby the directions had been issued to the petitioner distribution licensee to refund the amount charged to a consumer on account of theft of energy and further ordering that the same be recovered from the concerned Junior Engineer, Incharge. A further prayer was made to seek a declaration that the CGRF had no jurisdiction to hear/entertain any complaint in respect of an action taken by the distribution licensee either under Section 126 or Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 especially when a separate procedure/remedy had been provided for the same under the Act.

4. It is averred that respondent No.2- Zile Singh was a consumer of the petitioner distribution licensee having Electricity Account No.CC4D-1236/Meter Sr. No.992097 for domestic use. During the course of a meter replacement drive against the old meter by smart meters, the meter of consumer-respondent No.2 was replaced on 27.11.2017. The above said replaced meters were sent to M&T Lab Sirsa for checking on 15.3.2018 vide challan form No.735-738. After the checking of the meters on 16.3.2018, 11 meters including the meter of respondent No.2 were found tampered and were returned vide Memo No.404 with the report/remarks as 'seal tampered' and with a suggestion that the meters be sent to M&T Lab Hisar for a joint inspection. Hence, a notice vide Memo No.782 dated 20.03.2018 was issued to respondent No.2- Zile Singh directing him to appear at the M&T Lab Hisar on 22.3.2018 at 10:00 A.M. for checking of the meter in his presence. The said notice was received by daughter of the consumer. Despite receipt of the said notice, respondent No.2, chose not to appear at the M&T Lab Hisar, hence, the inspection was conducted by the Laboratory in the absence of the consumer, under videography. During the course of inspection both the round lead seals were found tampered and during internal inspection three numbers of extra resistance were found inserted in the circuit of the C.T. to manipulate the working of the meter. The above said inspection report established tampering of meter and making it a case of theft of energy under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 .

5. Hence, a provisional assessment-cum-notice dated 27.3.2018, was served upon respondent No.2 as per the provisions of the Electricity Supply Code calling upon the respondent to deposit a sum of Rs.26,184/- as per Section 135 1-A and a sum of Rs.4,000/- as compounding charges assessed under Section 152 of the Electricity Act, 2003 . Simultaneously, a complaint was also sent to the concerned Station House Officer for registration of the FIR, which was registered at Police Station-Hisar, on 03.05.2018.

6. Instead of submitting any response to the assessment-cum-notice dated 27.03.2018 or depositing the amount as determined, the respondent No.2-consumer filed a civil suit in the Court of Mrs. Archana Yadav, Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, with a prayer for interim relief against the disconnection of the supply. An interim relief was initially granted by the Civil Court and the petitioner distribution licensee was restrained from disconnecting the electricity connection subject to payment of 50% of the outstanding amount vide order dated 16.04.2018. An objection regarding lack of jurisdiction of Civil Court under the Electricity Act, 2003 was raised before the Civil Court by the petitioner whereupon the said Civil Suit was withdrawn vide order dated 03.07.2018. It is further averred that despite being apprised about the re