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/006/2016 Dr. N.G. Mejoy Sebastine Kochi – 682 012 
|
|
| The appellant is a consumer under Electrical Section, Cheranellore having 4 Nos. of electrical connections having the following consumer Nos. and tariffs. 1. Consumer No. 3376 LT I A II Floor 2. Consumer No. 3377 LT I A I Floor 3. Consumer No. 3378 LT VII B Ground Floor 4. Consumer No. 3379 LT I A Ground Floor The connections are registered in the name of Smt. Mema P.G., the appellant’s mother-in-law and the appellant is the occupant of the building at present. On 17-09-2015, a team of APTS inspected the premises and detected that the service connections with consumer Nos. 3377 and 3379 issued for domestic purpose are being used for commercial purposes. Based on the above findings the Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Cheranellore issued two penal bills dated 19-09-2015 for Rs. 11,872.00 (consumer no. 3379) and Rs. 14,407.00 (consumer no. 3377) which was remitted by the appellant on 25-09-2015. Aggrieved against this, the appellant filed a complaint before the CGRF (Central Region), Ernakulam. The Forum dismissed the petition vide order No. 91/2015-16 dated 23-1-2016 by holding that the case is not maintainable as the disputed penal bill was issued under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Against the decisions of the CGRF, the appellant has approached this Authority with this appeal petition. In the case at hand it is evident that even before affording an opportunity to file objections and even before conducting any personal hearing the respondent demanded payment of the amount of penalty provisionally assessed. Such a demand cannot be sustained under law and liable to be quashed. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The appeal petition is found having some merits and is admitted. Order of CGRF No. 91/2015-16 dated 23-1-2016 is set aside. No order as to costs. |
| P/177/2015 The Secretary, Ice Sellers Sannadha Sangam, Kollam
|
|
| The appellant is running an ice production unit in the name and style "Ice Sellers Sannadha Sangam" and is an industrial consumer (LT IV A tariff) having a three phase connection with consumer no. 1145717014951 under Electrical Section, Chavara. On 23-02-2015 APTS team Thiruvalla inspected the premises of the appellant along with Sub Engineer, Electrical Section, Chavara who prepared a mahazar stating that 3rd phase of the meter is not recording the actual consumption due to the defect in the CT meter connection and also detected that the meter is recording only 2/3rd of the total consumption. Hence a short assessment bill dated 21-05-2015 for Rs. 9,73,097.00 (Nine Lakhs seventy three thousand and ninety seven only) for the period from 3/2014 to 2/2015 was served on the appellant on 25-05-2015. Aggrieved against this, the appellant approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (South), Kottarakkara by filing a complaint No. 1530/2015 which was dismissed vide order dated 07-11-2015. Still aggrieved with the above decisions of CGRF the appellant has approached this Authority with this appeal petition. In view of the above discussions it can be concluded that the short assessment issued for a period of one year from 03/2014 to 02/2015 is without any valid grounds and hence decided to quash the same. The respondent is directed to revise the assessment based on the average consumption for the 3 billing cycles after the rectification of defects in the CT connections for a maximum period of 2 billing cycles as per Regulation 125 of Supply Code, 2014. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The appeal petition is found having some merits and is admitted. CGRF order in OP No. 1530/2015 dated 07-11-2015 is set aside. No order as to costs. |
| P/005/2016 Smt. C.P Maggie, Thiruvananthapuram
|
|
| The appellant is a consumer having consumer nos. 11481 and 4758 with connected load of 5 kW and 39.76 kW respectively under the Electrical Section, Cantonment, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellant applied for an additional load of 70 kW after completing the construction of the building, but the respondent objected the enhancement of connected load and directed the appellant to comply with the formalities of High Rise building including erection of a new transformer for the enhancement of the connected load. The contention of the appellant is that the building is only a multi-storeyed one and not coming under the category of High rise buildings. On the other hand, the respondent’s contention is that as per the approved plan there is a terrace floor which is situated below the lift machine room and above the fourth floor. The terrace floor heights to 2.57 metre is a dwelling area which can be used for other functions and hence the total height of the building is 18.65 metre which comes under high rise building category and LT supply to high rise building can be issued only after satisfying the conditions as envisaged under relevant Regulations in the Supply Code, 2014. Aggrieved against the stand of respondent, the appellant approached CGRF (South), Kottarakkara and filed OP No. 1577/2015. The Forum disposed of the petition on 18-01-2016 by upholding the decision of the respondent that the building having height of more than 16 metre and the appellant is bound to comply the formalities of high rise building for availing enhancement of connected load. Not satisfied with the above decision, the appellant filed this appeal before this Authority. As per Rule 32 of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules similar roof structures other than pent houses shall not be included for the purpose of considering the height of the building. Since the terrace building is not having a pent house the appellant’s argument that this area can be used as a dwelling place in future cannot be justified. Hence the respondent is directed to issue feasibility for enhancing the connected load of 70 kW without insisting the formalities of High Rise building category. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The appeal petition is found having some merits and is admitted. The order dated 18-01-2016 of CGRF in OP No. 1577/2015 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 | 4209 |
 | All | 4878199 |