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/060/2017 Smt. Archana V.S. Thiruvananthapuram 
|
|
| The Appellant, Smt. Archana V.S. is a registered consumer of Electrical Section, Peroorkada having Consumer No. 32149 under Electrical Sub Division, Vellayambalam. The appellant has applied for a three phase electric connection under domestic tariff. The appellant was directed to remit an amount of Rs. 27,240/- as per the estimate prepared for effecting the service connection and he had remitted amount under protest along with security deposit of Rs. 2,400/-. The complaint of the appellant is that the respondent collected excess amount towards the expense of electricity supply than the amount authorized under the regulation in Supply Code. Being aggrieved, she filed petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara and not satisfied by its decision to dismiss the petition, the appellant has filed the appeal petition. From the analysis done and the conclusions arrived at, which are detailed above, I take the following decisions. The respondent shall evaluate the works based on the actual quantities of the expenditure reasonably incurred and excess remittances if any, shall be refunded by adjustment in the monthly current charges/ direct refund within a period of one month. The order dated 06-03-2017 issued by the CGRF, Kottarakkara, in Petition No. 295/2016 is modified to this extent. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs. |
| P/055/2017 Sri. Shaukathali K., Malappuram
|
|
| The appellant is an industrial consumer with consumer No. 7279 under Electrical Section, Edavanna having a connected load of 35 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. 94,395/- (Rupees Ninety Four Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Five only). Aggrieved by this, the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (NR) by filing a petition in OP No. 188/2015-16. The Forum quashed the short assessment bill for Rs. 94,395/- and directed the respondent to issue short assessment bill in compliance to 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. 188/2015-16. 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. 05/2016-17. 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. 94,395/- 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. 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. 188/2015-16 dated 30-06-2016 is upheld and the order of CGRF in Review Petition 05/2016-17 in OP No. 188/2015 dated 31-03-2017 is set aside. No order on costs. |
| P/053/2017 Sri. Jose Joseph Kottayam
|
|
| The appellant is a High Tension consumer under Electrical Section, Kidangoor vide Consumer No. HT/15/1954, with a contract demand of 140 kVA. The appellant is the Managing Partner of M/s Universal Rubbers which is a partnership firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of tread rubber. The appellant had submitted a complaint dated 20-10-2004 to the respondent on certain defects in the metering of electrical energy for the month of September 2004 as there was a huge increase in the recorded maximum demand without any additional load used in the premises. As directed by the official of TMR unit Pallom the CT/PT unit was repaired and the CT/PT unit and a new ToD meter were produced before the TMR Division for testing on 24-08-2005. The respondent rejected the CT/PT unit on the ground that the ratio of CT/PT was not matching with the contract demand and the appellant was asked to replace the same with a new one. An amount of Rs. 26,077/- (50% of the electricity bill of August 2005) towards penalty for faulty CT/PT was issued to the appellant. Again the appellant was issued another arrear bill amounting to Rs. 82,859/- with interest 24% per annum towards the penalty for faulty CT/PT and ToD meter for the months of 09/2005, 10/2005 and 11/2005. Aggrieving by this demands, the appellant approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in W.P. (C) No. 8867 of 2006 which was disposed of with a direction to make an appropriate application before the CGRF having Jurisdiction over the area in question and to re-connect the electricity supply of the petitioner’s premises on condition of payment of Rs. 40,000/- within a period of one month, vide judgment dated 17th August 2016. Accordingly, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara, requesting to quash the letter dated 24-08-2005 of the respondent directing to replace the CT/PT and to return the amount with interest to the petitioner which was illegally collected in the name of penalty and interest for the delay in installing CT/PT unit, with Petition No. OP 260/2016 and the Forum dismissed the petition due to lack of merit vide its order dated 30-03-2017. Aggrieved by the decision, the appellant has submitted the appeal petition before this Forum. The appellant was allowed one month time for replacement of the faulty items, vide letter dated 24-07-2005 by the Deputy Chief Engineer i.e., time allowed till 24-08-2005 and the appellant produced the repaired items within the time specified which was rejected on some technical grounds. The appellant purchased the new CT/PT on 19-10-2005 and produced for inspection as directed by the Dy. Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Pala, but the commissioning of the same delayed up to 21-11-2005 not because of the fault of the appellant. In view of the above discussions, the issuance of bills for Rs. 26,077/- and Rs. 82,859/-is hereby quashed. Penalty of 50% extra charged is limited from 25-08-2005 to 19-10-2005 and the respondent shall issue revised bills accordingly. Excess amount if any, collected shall be refunded with bank interest applicable. The revised orders shall be issued within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. The order of CGRF in OP No. 260/2016 dated 30-03-2017 is set aside. 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 | 1265 |
 | All | 4880034 |