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/094/2017 Rev. Fr. Koshy Vaidyan, Kollam. 
|
|
| Two numbers of service connections with consumer Nos. 5226 and 5227 were effected in favour of Mar Theodosius Medical Mission Hospital, Poruvazhy under Electrical Section Sasthamkotta, under LT VI A tariff. The connected loads of these connections are 68 kW and 39 kW respectively. The Anti Power Theft Squad (APTS) Wing of KSEB Ltd conducted an inspection in the appellant’s premises on 08-11-2016 and detected that the tariff assigned to the appellant was LT VI A tariff instead of the eligible tariff of LT VI F. The appellant had been enjoying the concessional tariff, which is eligible only to those consumers having registration under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955, the donation to which are exempted from income tax. Since the appellant was billed under LT VI A tariff, a short assessment bills dated 15-11-2016 amounting to Rs. 3,19,816/- to consumer number 5226 and Rs. 1,34,758/- to consumer number 5227 were issued towards the undercharged amount due to wrong fixation of tariff. Aggrieved against this, the appellant approached with a petition before CGRF (South), Kottarakkara, which was disposed of by the Forum vide order in OP No. 379/2017 dated 22-06-2017 by directing the respondent to change the tariff of the consumer as per the revised tariff order of KSERC dated 17-04-2017 and the petitioner shall remit the amount within one month from the date of receipt of the order and also allowed six monthly instalments without interest. Against the above order, the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority with a request to retain the tariff under LT VI A and to set aside the short assessment bills issued to the institution. Considering the above facts and legal provisions pertaining to the issue this Authority is of the considered view that the appellant’s premises is not eligible for LT VI A tariff. So, the appeal petition stands dismissed as it is found having no merits. The appellant shall remit the bills within one month from the date of receipt of this order and the respondent shall allow sufficient instalments without interest, if the appellant applies for the same. The order of CGRF (South), Kottarakkara in OP No. 379/2017 dated 22-06-2017 is upheld. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order as to costs. |
| P/089/2017 Sri. R. Anilkumar, Kollam.
|
|
| The appellant is having consumer no. 6318 under LT VIIA tariff. A bill for Rs. 18,795/- was issued to the appellant after inspection conducted by the Regional Audit Wing along with the Section officials on 27-02-2017. It is alleged that the appellant had connected unauthorized load of 2237 Watts in the premises. The appellant filed an objection before the Assessing Officer which was rejected. The appellant filed a complaint before the CGRF (South) against the assessment of the Assessing Officer. According to the respondent the matter of the complaint is an assessment under Section 126 of the Act and the CGRF is barred from entertaining such complaints in view of 21 (f) (vii) (I) of the KSERC (CGRF & Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005 and the Forum dismissed the petition due to lack of jurisdiction, vide order no. 400/2017 dated 27-06-2017. Aggrieved against this order this appeal petition was filed. Hearing of the case was conducted on 20-10-2017 in the Court Hall of CGRF, Kottarakkara. Sri Anil Kumar, the appellant was present. Sri Shibu R, Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, Kadakkal appeared for the respondent. In view of the arguments made by both parties, it appears that the foremost question to be decided in this matter is whether the appeal is maintainable or not. It is needless to enter into the merits of the case, if this Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Anyhow, I would like to reiterate that this Authority does not have any authority to entertain this complaint, since the bill raised under Section 126 based on allegation of unauthorised load of electricity and the assessment was made under Section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003 which falls under the exception clause 2 (f) (vii) (I) of the Regulations, 2005. The appellant’s remedy was only to file an appeal before the Statutory Authority under Section 127 of the Act. Instead of filing before the said Appellate Authority, the present appellant approached first the CGRF and thereafter this Authority. Moreover, CGRF/Electricity Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to entertain such complaints relating to unauthorised use of electricity as provided under Section 126 of the Act. But it is not fair that the CGRF has directed the consumer to approach this Authority with an appeal. It is therefore held that this appeal petition is not maintainable. The order of the CGRF is upheld. The appeal petition is rejected as not maintainable. |
| P/084/2017 Sri. Athikkal Muhammed Malappuram
|
|
| The appellant is an industrial consumer with consumer No. 4235 under Electrical Section, Edavanna having a connected load of 75 kW. The Audit team of Regional Audit Officer, Manjeri conducted an inspection during the month of November 2015 and found that the consumer was issued with undercharged bills from 10/2013 to 08/2015. Accordingly the appellant was issued with a short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 60,091/- (Rupees sixty thousand and ninety one only). Aggrieved by this, the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (NR) by filing a petition in OP No. 06/2016-17. The Forum quashed the short assessment bill for Rs. 60,091/- and directed the respondent to issue short assessment bill in compliance with Regulation 134 of KESC 2014 for ToD energy charges, demand charges electricity duty and meter rent as per the readings recorded in the office register. The respondent had filed a review petition before the CGRF requesting to review the order dated 30-06-2016 issued in OP No. 06/2016-17. It is submitted by the respondent that the Forum erred and failed to see the power factor incentive/disincentive has been introduced by the licensee from 01-09-2013 based on the order of the Regulatory Commission published in Kerala Gazette dated 9th September 2013 and it is constructive notice and hence a separate notice is not mandatory. The Forum allowed the review petition vide order dated 31-03-2017 in review petition no. 07/2016-17. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority. From the conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to quash the short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 60,091/- issued to the appellant. The respondent is directed to revise the short assessment bill by deducting the incentive/disincentive from the calculation statement and issue the revised bill to the consumer within fifteen days. No interest is payable by the consumer up to the due date of the revised bill as ordered now. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The appeal petition filed by the consumer is allowed as ordered and stands disposed of as such. The order of CGRF, Kozhikode in OP No. 06/2016-17 dated 30-06-2016 is upheld and the order of CGRF in Review Petition 07/2016-17 in OP No. 06/2016-17 dated 31-03-2017 is set aside. No order on costs. |
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 | 1006 |
 | All | 4879775 |