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/049/2017 Sri. Muhammed Farookn Thiruvananthapuram 
|
|
| The appellant, Con.No.25667 is a consumer under Electrical Section, Kadakkal. It is a single phase service connection with registered connected load of 2800 watts and the assigned tariff is LT VII A. On 04-11-2016, KSEBL served a demand notice for Rs.23690/‐ towards the recovery of revenue loss due to meter not functioning correctly for the period from 05/2014 to 01/2015, based on an Audit report of the Internal Audit Wing of the licensee. Aggrieved by the bill, the consumer preferred a petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara which was partly allowed by quashing the impugned bill dated 4/11/2016 for Rs.23690/- and directing the respondent to revise the bill for the meter faulty period of two billing cycles from 12/2014 to 01/2015 based on the average consumption of succeeding three billing cycles after the meter replacement vide Order OP No. 313/2016 dated 14-03-2017. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has submitted this Appeal Petition before this Authority on 27/04/2017. From the analysis done and the conclusions arrived at, which are detailed above, I take the following decisions. 1. The order dated 14-03-2017 issued by the CGRF, Kottarakkara, in Op No. 313/2016 is set aside. 2. The revised short assessment bill for Rs.17266/- is quashed. The respondent is directed to reassess the bill based on the average consumption of 239 units for billing from 04/03/14 to 03/07/2014. 3. 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. 4. The request of the appellant for tariff change from LT VIIA to LT 1 A is rejected. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs. |
| P/026/2017 Sri. Salilan, Kollam.
|
|
| The appellant, Sri Salilan, Indhu Nivas, Mylamkulam, Puthur is an Industrial consumer under Electrical Section, Veliyam, Kollam bearing Consumer No.23136. This connection had been effected on 22-6-2011 to M/s. ‘Parth Precision Cast’ situated in the Mini Industrial Estate at Nalkavala, Pooyappally under Minimum Guarantee scheme with a connected load of 84 KW under LT-IV industrial tariff. The MG period for which the consumer is bound to pay the minimum amount as per the Agreement was for seven years from July 2011. The appellant had remitted current charges up to 05/2014 only and due to non-payment of electricity bills, the electric service connection was dismantled on 06-02-2015 and Revenue Recovery Notice for Rs. 6,33,242/- was issued to him towards the arrears of bills and the MG charges to be paid plus interest, for the realization of the amount. After initiating the RR action, as per the orders of KSEB, reconnection was effected in the premises on 05-03-2016 bearing a new consumer No. 25898 after collecting first installment amounting to Rs. 2,34,302/- on 30-12-2015 and with a condition to pay the balance amount by 10 monthly instalments without default. The appellant remitted instalments up to 01-07-2016 and due to default of balance installment, the service connection was disconnected on 01-08-2016. The appellant has requested to exempt from the action of revenue recovery ordered against him considering his present financial difficulties, and the amount already remitted at the KSEB and at the Village office as per the RR Action. The petition submitted before the CGRF was disposed of vide order OP No. 223/2016 dated 30-12-2016 with a direction to the respondent that he shall inform the Revenue Recovery authority to collect only the amount of Rs. 1,19,254/- from the consumer within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order. Still not satisfied with the order, the appellant filed this appeal petition before this Authority. This Forum intends to look into the facts of any ‘over payment’ and whether he is eligible for relief if any. 1. The order of CGRF in OP No. 223/2016 dated 30-12-2016 is herby quashed. The respondent is directed to take action to keep in abeyance the RR procedure for a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. 2. The respondent is directed to examine whether the line and transformer became self remunerative within the guarantee period and if so such benefit shall be given to the appellant from the month on which it became self remunerative. The Respondent shall take action to declare the Line as Self remunerative from such date onwards as the AEE has reported it as eligible for the same. The appellant is required to pay further, a balance amount only, if any, in such a situation. This shall be done within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order by preparing a detailed calculation statement and to issue the same to the appellant. 3. The respondent is directed to ensure the benefit of interest, if any, on Security Deposit at the date of adjusting the SD while finalizing in the balance MG amount. The respondent is also directed to consider the possibility of reducing the rate of interest of 18% under ‘one time settlement’, if the appellant submits an application for the same. 4. No interest need be payable by the consumer from the date of submission of the petition before the CGRF till the ‘due date’ of the revised bill as per this order. 5. The appellant is free to approach the licensee for reconnection as per rules after closing the MG agreement and settling the dues, if any, after adjusting the above amounts on reassessment. The excess amount, if any, shall be refunded to the consumer. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs. |
| P/050/2017 Sri. Anandan, Thiruvananthapuram
|
|
| The appellant is a domestic consumer having consumer number 2811 under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section, Kottukal. The appellant complaints that in his absence, the respondent has drawn electric over head line through his property to the nearby house owned by his brother, without his consent. The respondent had cut and removed the trees in his property for drawing the OH line which caused heavy loss to him. Another complaint raised by the appellant is that the respondent disconnected his domestic electric connection. The appellant raised objection against disconnection of service and requested restoration of supply. Being aggrieved, he filed petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara and not satisfied by its decision, 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. 1. The respondent is directed to reassess the bills from 03/2008 to 07/2017 under BPL category as per the relevant tariff orders issued by the KSERC from time to time and the excess amount collected shall be refunded with interest at bank rate or adjust in the future bills after effecting reconnection, if any. 2. The respondent is directed to give reconnection after settling the dispute, if he desires. If he not required reconnection, dismantle the connection after issuing proper notice, within a period of 45 days from the date of this order. 3. The bills from 11/2016 to the date of reconnection shall be settled in accordance with the prevailing tariff orders. 4. The respondent shall inspect the premises by issuing notice in advance and fix the existing connected load before effecting reconnection. 5. The request of the appellant for compensation for the loss incurred is rejected. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. 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 | 1163 |
 | All | 4879932 |