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/079/2017 Sri.Abdul Majeed V.P. Malappuram 
|
|
| The appellant is an industrial consumer with consumer No. 941 under Electrical Section, Edavanna having a connected load of 24 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. 44,172/- (Rupees forty four thousand one hundred and seventy two only). Aggrieved by this, the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (NR) by filing a petition in OP No. 184/2015-16. The Forum quashed the short assessment bill for Rs. 44,172/- and directed the respondent to issue short assessment bill in compliance with Regulation 134 of KESC 2014 for ToD energy charges, demand charges and electricity duty 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 28-06-2016 issued in OP No. 184/2015-16. 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. 01/2016-17. 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. 44,172/- 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. 184/2015-16 dated 28-06-2016 is upheld and the order of CGRF in Review Petition 01/2016-17 in OP No. 184/2015 dated 31-03-2017 is set aside. No order on costs. |
| P/078/2017 Sri. Tomy C. Vadayil Kottayam
|
|
| The appellant, Sri Tomy C. Vadayil, M/s Toms Pipes, is an industrial consumer with No. 14329 of Electrical Section, Thengana. The consumer had applied for enhancement of his ‘connected load’ from111 kW to 155 kW and to reduce contract demand from 123 kVA to 99 kVA on 13-01-2017. But his request was denied by the respondent for the reason that the increase in connected load above 150 kVA is not possible under an LT service connection. Being aggrieved with the said decision, the consumer filed petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara, on 06-02-2017. The CGRF dismissed the Petition on the ground that a consumer cannot claim to be retained as a LT service connection, when his ‘connected load’ has crossed the limit of 100 kVA (up to 150 kVA allowed to those as on the date of implementation of Electricity Supply Code, 2005) and hence found the petition devoid of merits. Here, the consumer has demanded his connected load to be increased to 155 kW, but at the same time he promises to limit his maximum demand (use of electricity) with in ‘contract demand’ of 99 kVA itself. Still aggrieved by the decision of CGRF vide order No. OP No. 361/2017 dated 19-06-2017, the appellant has filed the Appeal petition before this Forum on 10-07-2017. From the analysis done and the Findings and conclusions arrived at, I take the following decision. The consumer may either change over to HT category, if he requires 155 kW load or continue in the present connected load under LT category. He shall remove the excess load and may give application in Annexure 11 for reduction in contract demand, if he so desires. Having decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The appeal Petition filed by the appellant vide appeal petition No. P/078/2017 is disposed of with the said directions issued. No order on costs. |
| P/073/2017 Sri. Mambram Divakaran, Kannur.
|
|
| The appellant is a Low Tension consumer bearing consumer number 9197 under Electrical Section, Pinarayi, Kannur District. The tariff assigned to this connection is LT VI F and the sanctioned connected load in the premises is 18340 Watts. The appellant had applied for additional connected load of 56 kW for the newly constructed floors of the four storeyed building having the height of 16 metres. The respondent has directed the appellant to construct the internal distribution network, including the service line, transformer, switch gear etc at his cost. So the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (NR) by filing a petition in OP No. 159/2016-17. The Forum dismissed the petition with a direction that the respondent shall arrange a joint inspection with the petitioner in the premises and expedite the processing of the application for additional load as per Regulation 49 of Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 vide order dated 20-05-2017. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority. In this case, it is noted that the appellant is the owner of the High rise building having a LT connection No 9197 and requires additional load, in the extended multi storeyed building having four floors. From the analysis done and the conclusions arrived at I take the following decisions on the reliefs sought above by the appellant. For additional electric load (Power) demanded, the consumer is bound to act as per the Regulations made under Electricity Supply Code, 2014, i.e. under clause 49(4) and 49(5), which requires the installation of an exclusive transformer, in case for a High rise building, irrespective of the load demand. That being a specific rule, the contentions of the appellant does not deserve merit and therefore he is found liable to provide an exclusive transformer for meeting his additional load demand. After obtaining scheme approval from the Electrical Inspectorate and submitting to the respondent, the consumer shall take steps for installing a separate Transformer of suitable capacity and complete other works, for catering the power load for the LT service connections of the High rise building, at his cost. The respondent shall prepare a demand on the estimate cost of work at their end for giving supply to the appellant and serve, at any rate within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt of intimation regarding the scheme approval by the Electrical Inspector and carry out the works on remittance of the estimate cost by the appellant. The respondent shall take proper action to provide the connection without any further delay. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The order dated 20-05-2017 of CGRF (NR) in OP No. 159/2016-17 is upheld. The Appeal Petition filed by the consumer, Sri. Mambaram Divakaran, is decided as above and stands disposed of. 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 | 1041 |
 | All | 4879810 |