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/032/2017 Sri. Arun R Chandran, Ernakulam 
|
|
| The appellant represents M/s Indus Towers Ltd., a company providing passive infra structure service to telecommunication providers. The consumer number of the three phase service connection is 10480 under LT VI F tariff and is under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section, Medical College, Thrissur. The appellant is paying the current charges regularly without any due or delay. But the respondent as per the invoice dated 01-10-2014 directed the appellant to remit an amount of Rs. 58,058/- based on the site mahazar prepared consequent to the inspection of APTS unit Thrissur on 26-09-2014, being the short assessment for not recording one phase of the meter from 31-05-2014 to 26-09-2014. An objection against the demand was filed before the Assistant Engineer on 13-10-2014. Later another revised bill dated 02-03-2015 amounting to Rs.133748/- was issued to the consumer based on the average consumption after the replacement of the meter. Another objection against the demand was filed before the Assistant Engineer on 10-03-2015. After a personal hearing conducted, a final revised short assessment bill dated 21/04/2015 for Rs.74,830/- was issued. So the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (CR) by filing a petition in No. 26/2015-16. The Forum directed the respondent to revise the bill with the percentage error mentioned in the mahazar for 24 months preceding the date of inspection, vide order dated 30-06-2016. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority. In view of the above facts, the revised bill for Rs. 3,66,798/- towards the short assessment during the alleged faulty meter period is hereby quashed. The respondent is directed to reassess the consumption from 31-05-2014 to 29-10-2014 based on the average consumption from the three billing cycles after the replacement of the meter on 29-10-2014 and to revise the bill accordingly. The respondent shall issue the revised bill to the consumer with thirty days time (due date) given for making the payment. The order of CGRF in Petition No. 26/2015-16 dated 30-06-2016 is hereby set aside. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order as to costs. |
| P/045/2017 Sri. Akhil Sreeni, Punalur, Kollam
|
|
| This appeal petition is filed by Mr. Akhil Sreeram, S/o R. Sreeni, Partner, M/s Thailekshmi Theatre, T.B Junction, Valacode P.O., Valacode village, Punalur Taluk residing at VURA 82 A, Rambhavan, Vadakemulloor Road, Anayara, Thiruvananthapuram, Consumer number 1145932003343, who is the legal heir of R. Sreeni, being aggrieved by the order in OP No: 301/2016 dated 6/03/2017. The said R. Sreeni was the complainant in the complaint filed before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, Kottarakkara on 25/11/2016. The complainant, R. Sreeni died on 27/11/2016. The appellant has a three phase service connection with registered connected load of 23 KW and the assigned tariff is LT VII C. A cinema theatre named Thailekshmi has been functioning in the premises. On 15.10.2016, a surprise inspection was carried out in the premises by the Anti Power Theft Squad ,Kollam along with the section officials and noticed that there was connected and using a total load of 75 kW, without obtaining prior sanction from the licensee and hence there was connected and using an unauthorised load 52 kW in the premises. Accordingly a site mahazar was prepared and based on the site mahazar for the unauthorised load to the tune of 52 kW, a provisional assessment for Rs. 7,24,831/-was issued to the consumer under section 126 of the Act 2003. Against the same, the consumer had filed an appeal before the Assessing Officer and after conducting a hearing the provisional assessment was revised for Rs. 5,37,956/-(UAL 30 kW) and a final assessment order was issued along with detailed calculation statement. Though the consumer had been informed in the final order itself that the appeal authority is the Appellate Authority, he approached the Hon'ble CGRF (South) vide OP No.301/2016 and the Hon'ble Forum pronounced its order on 06.03.2017 holding that 'the forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the case is against the bill issued under 126 of the Electricity Act 2003 and also directed the petitioner to file appeal before the appellate authority. Instead of filing appeal before the aforesaid statutory authority, the appellant herein approached first the CGRF and thereafter this Authority. It seems that the modus operandi of the appellant was to protract the dispute for a further period without paying any portion of the billed amount. Moreover, CGRF / Electricity Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to entertain complaints relating to unauthorised use of electricity as provided under Section 126 of the Act, in view of the bar under Sub Clause (vii) (I) of Clause 2 (f) of the Regulations. It is therefore held that the remedy available to the appellant is only an appeal before the Statutory Authority under Section 127 and that this appeal petition is not maintainable. The order of the CGRF is upheld. The appeal petition is rejected as not maintainable. The appellant is directed to approach the Appellate Authority. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order as to costs. |
| P/048/2017 Sri. Arun R Chandran, Ernakulam
|
|
| The appellant represents M/s Indus Towers Ltd., a company providing passive infrastructure service to telecommunication providers. The consumer number of the three phase service connection is 32313 under LT VI F tariff and is under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section, Nedumangad. The appellant is paying the current charges regularly without any due or delay. But the respondent as per the invoice dated 30-08-2016 directed the appellant to remit an amount of Rs. 2,35,224/- based on the site mahazar prepared consequent to the inspection of APTS on 29-08-2016, being the short assessment for not recording one phase of the meter from 01/2016 to 08/2016. An objection against the demand was filed before the Assistant Engineer on 26-09-2016. He rejected the petition without quoting any valid reason or regulations and directed the appellant to remit the short assessed amount. So the appellant had approached the Hon’ble CGRF (SR) by filing a petition in No. 291/2016. The Forum dismissed the petition due to lack of merit, vide order dated 29-03-2017. Aggrieved against this, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority. From the analysis done above and the conclusions arrived at, I take the following decisions. From the conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I am fully convinced that the request of the appellant is reasonable and hence admitted. I decide that the order of the CGRF stands quashed. The short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 2,35,224/- issued to the appellant is set aside. The respondent is directed to reassess the consumption for the period in between the last meter reading date and the date of inspection on 29-08-2016 based on the average consumption from the three billing cycles from 09/2016 onwards and to revise the bill accordingly. The respondent shall issue the revised bill to the consumer with fifteen days time (due date) given for making the payment. 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. |
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 | 1180 |
 | All | 4879949 |