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/162/2015 Sri Haneefa, Pathanamthitta 
|
|
| The appellant, Sri Haneefa, is a consumer with consumer No. 12243 under Electrical Section, Vaipur, and is running a vehicle service station. The service connection was effected on 12-04-2011 under LT IV A tariff. The Regional Audit office, Pathanamthitta during their audit conducted at Electrical Section, Vaipur in October 2013, had noticed that the connection given to the appellant’s service station was classified under LT IV A tariff instead of LT VII A tariff. As per the above audit report, the respondent changed the tariff of the appellant and a short assessment bill was issued to him, directing to remit an amount of Rs. 39,107.00 being the difference in the tariff (industrial and commercial) from 12-04-2011 onwards. The appellant filed objections against the bill before the various authorities in the Board. As the reply was not satisfactory the appellant approached the Hon’ble High Court with WP (C) 1889/14 which was disposed with a direction to the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Thiruvalla to consider the request of appellant and pass appropriate orders. The Executive Engineer conducted a hearing on 19-12-2014 as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court and disposed the petition without allowing any relief. Hence the appellant lodged complaint before the CGRF, Kottarakkara, on 05-02-2015. The CGRF, after hearing the case dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition had already been decided and disposed by the Hon’ble High Court in WP (C) 1889/2014 vide judgment dated 20-01-2014, directed the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Thiruvalla for taking decision. The Executive Engineer disposed the petition by confirming the bill already issued by the respondent. So the appellant approached CGRF against the decision of Executive Engineer in OP No. 1426/2015 which was disposed with a direction to revise the impugned bill for 24 months, vide order dated 13-7-2015. Still not satisfied with the decision of CGRF, the appellant has filed the Appeal petition before this Authority on 05-10-2015. Since the CGRF has already decided the case in favour of the appellant, this Authority finds no scope for further intervention in the matter. Hence it is decided to quash the short assessment bill issued for Rs. 39,107.00. The respondent is directed to revise the bill limiting the period as 24 months and the revised assessment shall be served within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Appeal is hereby dismissed. CGRF order in OP No. 1426/2015 dated 13-07-2015 is hereby confirmed. No order as to costs. |
| P/169/2015 Sr. Alice Pendanathu, Mundakkayam.
|
|
| The service connection with consumer No.18778 is effected in favour of M/s Karuna Bhavan Medical Centre, Koruthodu P.O under Electrical Section Mundakkayam and the tariff is LT VI F. The connected load of the premises is 20000 Watts. The appellant had submitted an application for tariff change from LT VI F to LT VI A which was not allowed by the Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Mundakkayam for the reasons that the appellant had not submitted required documents. Aggrieved against this the appellant approached with a petition before CGRF (South), Kottarakkara. The petition was disposed of by the CGRF vide order in OP No.1509/2015 dated 19-9-2015 with a direction to the respondent to change the tariff from LT VI F to LT VI A when the appellant produces the certificate under Section 80 G from the Income Tax Department. Not satisfied with the above order, the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority. Since the appellant failed to produce documents to show that one time approval under Section 80 G (5) (vi) of Income Tax Act, 1961, the request for tariff change cannot be admitted. However, the appellant is free to approach the respondent for reclassification of tariff as per Regulation 98 of Kerala Supply Code, 2014 with relevant approval under Section 80 G (5) (vi) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Order of CGRF In OP No. 1509/2015 is upheld. The appeal is disposed accordingly. No order as to costs. |
| P/176/2015 Sri P.J. John Edappally, Kochi-24.
|
|
| The appellant in this petition had applied for power allocation of 109.5 kW and the respondent directed to remit and amount of Rs. 10,000.00 as cash deposit for issuing power allocation. The appellant had remitted Rs.10,000.00 on 26-10-2007. Further, the respondent prepared an estimate amounting to Rs. 1,67,447.00 for carrying out the work required for giving supply to the appellant. The appellant remitted the estimated amount of Rs. 1,67,447.00 on 14-12-2007. It is alleged that as the appellant failed to avail the supply after a lapse of 90 days from the date of receipt of notice issued by the respondent, demand for an amount of Rs. 11,97,700.00 was issued to the appellant towards the Unconnected Minimum Charges. Being aggrieved by the above demand, the appellant approached the CGRF, Ernakulam by filing petition on 02-07-2015 with a request to waive the Unconnected Minimum Charges. The CGRF disposed the petition vide Order No. CGRF-CR/Comp/42/2015-16/400 dated 29-10-2015 directing the respondent to revise the demand notice for a period 10-04-2013 to 31-03-2014. The supply shall be effected within 15 days from the date of remittance of the Unconnected Minimum Charges by the appellant. Still not satisfied with the decision, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition with a plea to set aside the decision of the CGRF to collect Unconnected Minimum Charges from the appellant for a period 10-04-2013 to 31-03-2014. The respondent failed to prove that any capacity idling or any electrical plant erected exclusively for the use of appellant consequent to the issue of power allocation. In this background, there is no justification for issuing UCM charges for an amount of Rs. 11,97,000.00 and hence quashed. The respondent is also directed to provide HT connection to the appellant within a period of 30 days and to allow the interest admissible for the amount of Rs. 1,67,447 with effect from January 2015. Appeal is found having some merit and is admitted. The CGRF order in OP No. 42/2015-16 dated 29-10-2015 is set aside. 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 | 4142 |
 | All | 4878132 |