KERALA ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN
D.H. Road & Foreshore Road Junction,
Near Gandhi Square,
Ernakulam, Kerala-682 016
Ph: 0484 2346488, Mob: 8714356488
Downloads - Orders
Downloads
 Overview |
 Search Downloads |
 Submit file |
 Up |
| Category: Orders | ||
 Orders |
Files: 1245 | |
| Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman in pdf format |
||
Files:
 P-033-2021- Sri. Johny Joseph, Ernakulam- Order 28-09-2021 
|
|
| The appellant received two short assessment bills in respect of Consumer number 26631 and 26632 for Rs.3,4261/- and Rs.32,253/- respectively in the month of 12/2020. The period of short-assessment is 08/2017 to 10/2017, stating meter changed on 30-10-2017. The appellant filed petition before CGRF, Central Region and the Forum in its order issued the following :- “(1) The petition is quashed due to lack of merits; (2) The higher Officers of the Licensee may re-examine the period of short assessment bill issued. The appellant filed this appeal petition before this Authority. It is decided to quash the short-assessed bills for Rs.34,261/- in respect of consumer number 26631 and for Rs.32,253/- in respect of consumer number 26632. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant, stands allowed as above. The order of CGRF, Central Region in OP No: 89/2020-21 dated 17-04-2021 is set aside. |
| P-032-2021- Sri. Joseph Mathai, Alappuzha- Order 28-09-2021
|
|
| The grievance of the appellant is regarding shifting of a High Tension (HT) line passing over the property of the appellant. The appellant requested the Officers of the Licensee, KSEB Ltd., for the shifting of the line, but finally approached CGRF, Central Region and Forum in its order issued the following :- “(1) The respondent shall furnish the detailed cost for shifting the line as suggested by the petitioner along with details of consents required for the line shifting. On satisfying these demands by the petitioner, the respondent shall arrange the shifting work immediately.” The appellant filed the appeal petition before this Authority. The 11 kV overhead single circuit line passing through the road side and in front of the house of the appellant is not a service connection line, but the line is intended to supply power to various number of consumers. This Authority suggested three proposals for deviating a portion of 11 kV line from the property of the appellant: - (1) The respondent shall look into the possibility of some modifications on the electric poles situated on either side of the disputed portion of the line (Pole No. K/KE/133 and K/KE/134) or inserting an electric pole along the line without creating inconvenience to the appellant or to the road users. If it is feasible, the entire expense for the work as above including material cost and labour charge shall be met by the Licensee. (2) The respondent shall look into the feasibility of converting the Low Tension (LT) line from K/KE/132 to ‘C1’ in the Northern side of the road to 11 kV by shifting the 11 kV electric pole K/KE/133 in the location ‘C’ in the Southern side of the road to ‘C1’ or a convenient location on the Northern side of the road and constructing 11 kV overhead single circuit line from ‘C1’ to pole No: K/KE/134 situated in the location ‘B’ on the Southern side of the road. In brief, the new route of the 11 kV line will be ‘A-B-C1-D’, as per the sketch submitted by the respondent. The appellant shall remit the cost of additional materials required, if any, and the labour charge for the rerouting of the 11 kV line, if the shifting is technically feasible. (3) The respondent shall also look into the technical feasibility of shifting the entire portion of the 11 kV line position ‘A-B-C-D’, in front of the appellant to ‘A-B1-C1-D’ to the Northern side of the road. The appellant shall meet the entire cost of shifting the line towards material, labour etc., if the above proposal is technically feasible. The respondent shall select a technically feasible proposal from the above and intimate the appellant within 30 days from the date of order. The order of CGRF, Central Region in OP No: 81/2020-21 dated 30-03-2021 is modified to this extent. |
| P-028-2021- Sri. Jamsheer. A, Kannur- Order 17-09-2021
|
|
| The appellant remitted Rs.1,41,894/- towards “other charges” specified in the regular monthly bills from 01-11-2018 to 02-11-2020. As per respondent “other charges” mentioned in bills are low power factor penalty. Since no action was taken by the Officers of KSEB Ltd., the appellant filed petition in CGRF, Northern Region, and the Forum in its order dated 02-03-2021 rejected the request of the appellant. The appellant filed this appeal petition before this Authority. There are lapses on the part of appellant in maintaining the rated values of capacitors to avoid power factor disincentives and lapses on the part of respondent to intimate the subject of low power factor to the appellant as per rules. As such, it is decided to refund the power factor penalty realized from the appellant for 12 months from 11/2019 to 11/2020, by limiting the period of refund requested by the appellant. The respondent shall refund the amount realized under “other charges” or “power factor penalty” from the appellant from 11/2019 to 11/2020 within 45 days from the date of order or adjust in the future bills. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant is allowed to this extent and the petition stands disposed of accordingly. The order of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Northern Region, Kozhikode vide No.126/2020-21 dated 02-03-2021 is set aside. |
Contact Us
Any Queries?
Send an email to info@keralaeo.org
Do you Know?
Consumers should submit petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.
Visitors Counter
 | Today | 1074 |
 | All | 4872393 |