Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 6 of 300
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 898
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
P/087/2019 Sr. Teris S.D . Angamaly


The appellant is a consumer under Electrical Section, Karukutty bearing consumer number 331 under LT VI G tariff with a connected load of 73 kW. The Section officials had conducted an inspection in the premises of the appellant and detected that the tariff assigned to the consumer is wrong and the tariff of the appellant reassigned to LT VI A from 01-07-2014. Again, the tariff assigned for this appellant was changed to LT VI D, which is the tariff assigned for old age homes run by charitable institutions or social organizations or non-governmental organizations as per tariff order published in Extra Ordinary Gazette No.782 dated 21-4-2017. The tariff LT VI D was effected on 01-06-2017 by the respondent based on the registration under Cultural, Scientific and Charitable Act 1955 and 12 A A registration for Income tax exemption. As per the respondent the correct tariff to be assigned to the appellant is LT VIG and accordingly the tariff was changed to VI G w.e.f. 01-3-2019. Since the appellant was wrongly classified under LT VI D tariff and billed accordingly, a short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 443706/- was served on 30-04--2019 towards the undercharged amount due to wrong fixation of tariff for the period 7/17 to 3/19. Aggrieved against this, the appellant approached with a petition before CGRF (Central), Ernakulam, which was disposed of by the Forum vide order in OP No. 14/2019-20 dated 03-09-2019 by dismissing the petition and allowed instalment facility. Against the above order, the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority with a request to quash the short assessment bill, on 18-11-2019. Considering the above facts and legal provisions pertaining to the issue, the short assessment bill for Rs. 4,43,706/- is quashed. The respondent shall revise the short assessment bill for the energy charge and limiting the fixed charge by taking 25% of the total connected load of 73 kW for the disputed period. So, the appeal petition stands allowed to this extent as it is found having merits. The order of CGRF in No. 14/2019-20 dated 03-09-2019 is set aside. No order as to costs.
P/083/2019 Sri. Johny K.L. Thrissur


The appellant has filed an appeal petition in P/083/2019, being aggrieved by the decision taken by the CGRF in OP No. 20/2018-19 dated 25-09-2019. The appellant is a domestic consumer under Electrical Section, Pudukad having consumer number 7588. The request of the appellant is to shift the pole under dispute to a convenient location. The CGRF, Ernakulam has disposed the petition filed by the appellant with the following orders. "(1) petition is dismissed due to lack of merit. (2) The respondent is directed to carry out necessary maintenance of the line after observing rules and ensuring adequate clearance within a week’s time. Still aggrieved by the order of the CGRF, the Appellant has filed the Appeal Petition before this Authority on29-10-2019. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide as follows: 1. The respondent shall maintain the line for ensuring the safe distribution of electricity and clearance shall be maintained as per rules. 2. The respondent shall look into the possibility of replacing the existing overhead line to Aerial Bunched Cables, if the cost is met by either of the affected parties. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly and the Appeal Petition filed by the appellant, stands allowed to the extent ordered. No order on costs.
P/084/2019 Smt. Sainamma Jose, Idukki


The appellant was an applicant for electricity connection for her house under the ‘Total Electrification Scheme” (TES) of the Kerala State Government for the year 2014. She had applied for service connection on 19-11-2014 under Kambilikandam Electrical Section and cash deposit (CD) Rs. 300/-, Electricity Charge for Service Connection (ECSC) for Rs. 2,150/- and Rs.50/-as AF have been remitted by the appellant in 29-11-2014. The respondent had denied electricity connection to her on the basis of various grounds including non getting of consent from other property owners and missing of application form in the Section Office. So the appellant had approached the CGRF Ernakulam by filing a petition in OP No. 31/2019-20 which was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to give service connection to the appellant under any other scheme approved by KSEBL vide order dated 04-09-2019. Still not receiving the service connection, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Authority on 31-10-2019. This is a clear case of negligence and irresponsible action on the part of the employees of the licensee. The respondent had failed to perform their duties as stipulated in the Act and the Code. The following deficiencies noted on the side of the respondent. 1. There was clear violations of the provisions of the Supply Code for providing a new connection to an applicant. 2. Dereliction of duty in taking up the subject with District Magistrate for orders to draw the line through the private property. 3. Failure to implement the Government orders for Total Electrification Scheme by taking timely action. 4. Lapses in maintaining application form for electric connection in the office. 5. Delayed the application for service connection for a period of five years. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide as follows: 1. The respondent shall select a technically feasible and shortest route for drawing single phase line to provide the electric connection to the appellant. 2. The appellant shall bear Rs.10000/- of the estimated cost of the line and weatherproof service connection. 3. The licensee shall bear the balance amount of expenses required for the single phase domestic connection to the appellant. 4. The licensee is directed to take appropriate action against the staff concerned who had committed dereliction of duties and negligence in this case and to recover the loss from the concerned after fixing responsibility. 5. The respondent shall carry out the work within a period of 30 days. 6. If any dispute in drawing the line occurred that shall be taken up with the District Magistrate immediately. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly and the Appeal Petition filed by the appellant, stands allowed. The order of CGRF, Ernakulam in 31/2019-20 dated 04-09-2019 is set aside. No order on costs.

Contact Us

Charangattu Bhavan,
Building No-36/895,
Mamangalam- Anchumana Road,
Edappally- P O.Kochi 682024, KERALA,
Phone#  +91 484 2346488

Any Queries?

Send an email to

Do you Know?

Consumers should submit  petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.

Visitors Counter