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/035/2018 Sri. Mohanakumar T.N. Alappuzha 
|
|
| The appellant is a domestic consumer having a three phase connection with connected load of 6960 Watts, vide Consumer No. 3864 under Electrical Section, Thattarambalam. While being so, he received an abnormal bill for Rs. 36760/†in 12/2017. He approached the Section Office with a complaint that he used to consume less and hence the disputed bill for Rs. 36,760/†was not in tune with his consumption. Based on the complaint the meter was sent to the meter testing laboratory and the appellant has been directed to remit the bill amount as it was proved that the meter was working in good condition and the errors are within limit. Being aggrieved by this, the consumer lodged a complaint before the CGRF, Ernakulam which was dismissed vide Order OP No. 107/2017-18 dated 14-05-2018. Aggrieved by this order, the consumer has filed the Appeal Petition before this Authority. In view of the factual position I don’t find any reason to interfere with the findings and decision taken by the CGRF, Ernakulam in this case and hence the order of CGRF is upheld. The appeal is found devoid of any merits and hence dismissed. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs. |
| P/034/2018 - Sr. Brigit Superior, Alappuzha
|
|
| The appellant is a consumer bearing consumer number 16480 and was running an old age home under Electrical Section, S.L. Puram, Cherthala, with LT VI D tariff assigned by KSEB. The service connection was registered in the name of Sister Celina, St. Agnus Convent Superior, Monna Tessa Convent with 23950 watts of connected load. On 24-11-2017, APTS, Kottayam inspected the premises of the appellant and found that the ‘old age home’ is not eligible for concessional electricity tariff, under LT VI D. Based on the findings of APTS, the Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, SL Puram reassigned the tariff as LT VII A and short assessment bill for Rs.89,956/- was issued on 27-11-2017 for tariff reclassification from 05/2017 to 11/2017. The appellant submitted an objection before Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Cherthala on 11-12-2017 and the Executive Engineer reassigned the tariff to LT VI C. Being aggrieved by the tariff reassigned, the appellant approached the CGRF, Ernakulum, pleading for lower rate tariff LT-VID. The CGRF after hearing disposed of the petition of the appellant confirming the tariff under VI C. Against the order of the CGRF, the appellant has filed a petition, challenging the order dated 14-05-2018 of CGRF, Ernakulam in OP No. 97/2017-18, before this Authority. Considering the above facts and legal provisions pertaining to the issue this Authority is of the considered view that the appellant’s premises are not eligible for LT VI D tariff. So, the appeal petition stands dismissed as it is found having no merits. The order of CGRF in No. 97/2017-18 dated 14-05-2018 is upheld. No order as to costs. |
| REVIEW PETITION NO. 05/2018 IN APPEAL PETITION No. P/004/2018 Smt. K.K Rajalakshmi, Kollam.
|
|
| The appellant had filed an appeal petition in P/356/2013, being aggrieved at the inaction of KSEB to shift the 11 KV electric line passing through her property to the road side, situated under Electrical Section, Alakode, in Kannur District. She alleges that the said electric line was drawn long ago through her property without obtaining her consent. She owns about 10 cents of land and due to the Line passing above; she finds difficulty to construct a house in her property underneath the said Line. Though the appellant had approached the KSEB for shifting the 11 KV line, they had prepared an estimate amounting to Rs. 87,698/†and demanded the appellant to remit the same. She is aggrieved by the huge sum demanded by KSEB for the work and sent complaints to higher authorities and since no proper action was taken on the same, she has filed petition before the CGRF, Kozhikode vide Petition No. OP No. 42/2012â€13 and the CGRF has disposed it by order dated 27-12-2012 by disallowing the request for exempting payment of shifting charge, but directed the respondent to revise the estimate excluding the cost of damaged poles. No glaring mistake or apparent errors on the face of record, on the order dated 13-04-2018 of this Authority, in Appeal Petition No. P/004/2018, were pointed out by the appellant here. In the review petition nothing is pointed out which escaped the notice of this Authority while disposing the appeal petition. The review jurisdiction is limited to rectify a mistake or an error which is apparent on the face of records and it cannot be used as appellate jurisdiction. In view of the above discussions, I hold that review petition is not maintainable as this Authority didn’t find any reason to intervene the order already issued. Hence the review petition is dismissed and disposed of accordingly. |
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 | 179 |
 | All | 4878948 |