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/061/2017 Sri. Chacko Varghese, Thiruvananthapuram. 
|
|
| The appellant is a consumer of electricity in LTIV tariff under the Beach Electrical Section Office of the KSEBL at Thiruvananthapuram with consumer number 10279. The Complaint is against the short assessment demand dated 18-08-2010 issued by the Assistant Engineer for an amount of Rs. 98,481/- towards arrears of electricity charges for the period 6/2004 to 10/2004 on the basis of a Audit report of the Regional Audit Officer. Challenging the above demand dated 18-08-2010, the appellant submitted a complaint CC No 276 of 2010 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thiruvananthapuram which was dismissed as per Order dated 01-11-2016 as not maintainable before that Forum without prejudice to file it before proper Forum for adjudication.. So the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF Kottarakkara by filing a petition in OP No. 275/2016. The Forum quashed the short assessment bill for Rs. 98,481/- and directed the respondent to revise the bill from 07/2004 to 10/2004 on the basis of 3 months average consumption from 11/2004 to 01/2005. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority. From the analysis done and the Findings and conclusions arrived at, I take the following decisions. The respondent has failed to replace the faulty meter for quite some months and even after its replacement in 09/04 and getting the true average consumption, failed to reassess the consumer subsequently. In the case of assessment done for the Industrial unit, pertaining to the period of 06/2004 to 11-09-2004, it is seen that the consumer was being billed with an average energy consumption of 10360 units per month. Later, after changing the faulty meter, the average energy consumption was obtained as 15853 units per month, as per Reg. 33(2) of T & C of supply. Accordingly the respondent has raised a bill for the meter faulty period of 06/2004 to 09/2004, with the difference of 27892 units. It is decided that the total assessment done for the disputed meter faulty period from 01-06-2004 to 11-09-2004 by the Respondent, has to be revised taking the average of previous six months consumption as 14687 units instead 15853 units and the actual consumption in the new meter for the remaining days of 09/2004. The respondent is directed to revise the bill as decided above and shall issue to the consumer with thirty days time (due date) given for making the payment. The consumer is also eligible for installments, if requested for, and the respondent may allow the same. No interest is payable by the consumer up to the due date of the revised bill as ordered now. But the consumer needs to pay the applicable interest for the installments from the due date of the revised bill, to the date of actual payment of installments. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The order dated 18-05-2017 of CGRF (SR) in OP No. 275/2016 is set aside. No order on costs. |
| P/067/2017 Sri. C.V. Thomas & Smt. Kunjumol, Kollam.
|
|
| The appellant has filed the appeal petition, being aggrieved at the inaction of KSEB to shift the transformer erected in their property without consent and the failure to remove the private advertisement board in the label of KSEB without consent, under Electrical Section, East Kallada, Kollam. They alleged that the said transformer erected in their property without obtaining consent. Though the appellant had approached and sent complaints to higher authorities no proper action was taken on the same. The appellants have filed petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara vide Petition No. OP No. 280/2016 and the CGRF has disposed it by order dated 01-03-2017, with a direction to the respondent; “ the respondent is directed to place the name board of the transformer with “Federal Bank Transformer”. Since this order was not complied with by the respondent, the appellant has filed the Appeal Petition, before this Authority. From the conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to upheld the order of CGRF, Kottarakkara in OP No. 280/2016 dated 01-03-2017. The respondent shall take action to rename the transformer within a period of 15 days from date of receipt of this order and inform the appellant after making necessary entries in the office records. 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. No order on costs. |
| P/064/2017 The Director, Devamatha Medical Institutions, Koratty, Thrissur
|
|
| Three numbers of service connections with consumer No. 10981, 10982 and 10983 were effected in favour of Devamatha Medical Institutions, Koratty, Thrissur under Electrical Section Koratty under LT VI A tariff. The connected load of these connections is 62 kW, 31 kW and 24 kW respectively. The Anti Power Theft Squad (APTS) Wing of KSEB Ltd conducted an inspection in the appellant’s premises on 21-03-2017 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, short assessment bills dated 04-07-2017 amounting to Rs. 5,88,091/- to consumer number 10981, Rs. 9,143/- to consumer number 10982 and Rs. 51,303/- to consumer number 10983 were issued towards the undercharged amount due to wrong fixation of tariff. Another complaint of the appellant is that he was denied HT conversion by the respondent. Aggrieved against this, the appellant approached with a petition before CGRF (Central), Ernakulam, which was disposed of by the Forum vide order in OP No. 8/2017-18 dated 22-06-2017 by cancelling the short assessment bills dated 04-07-2017 and directed the respondent to revise the bills limiting the period of short assessment for a period of 24 months and to consider his application for LT to HT conversion after clearing the dues in LT connections. 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 till the appellant gets the certificate 80G from Income Tax Department. 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 order of CGRF (Central Region), Ernakulam in OP No. 08/2017-18 dated 22nd June 2017 is upheld. However, the appellant is free to approach the respondent for reclassification of tariff as per Regulation 98 of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 with relevant approval under Section 80 G (5) (vi) of Income Tax Act, 1961 obtained from Income Tax Department. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order as to 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 | 1261 |
 | All | 4880030 |