Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 2 of 241
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 721
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
P/008/2018 - Sri. Viswamabaran K P., Kozhikode


The appellant had lodged complaints before KSEB against the erection of a ‘Stay and Wire’ in his property, by the KSEBL Officials, Electrical Section, West Hill, Kozhikode without obtaining his permission. This action was said to be done by the Section authorities as a part of system improvement and enhancing safety measures in the place of the wooden post replaced with a PSC post and stay attached earlier. The appellant is aggrieved at the ‘stay to Post’ erected in his land property without his consent. The appellant has approached the Board authorities for the removal of unauthorized, illegal erection of stay at appellant's property on 19-06-2014 to the electrical post P.P.32 under West Hill Electrical Section, Kozhikode and to get adequate financial compensation due to the difficulties, mischief, damages, obstructions, inconvenience caused to the life and property of the appellant and his family due to above illegal erection of stay even without obtaining any consent or intimation. Since no reply or action was taken by KSEB, the appellant preferred a petition before the CGRF, Kozhikode with a request to shift the ‘stay’ from his property. The CGRF had disposed the Petition vide order dated 09-01-2018, in OP No.116/2017-18, directing as; “The respondent shall shift the LT pole with stay to a location creating least inconvenience to the petitioner, with all safety measures. 2) the respondent shall carry out the shifting work within 30 days of remittance of DW amount. 3) the petitioner can approach the licensee for compensation.” Still not satisfied by the decision of the CGRF, the appellant has filed the Appeal petition before this Forum. In view of the above discussions, the respondent is directed to prepare a fresh estimate for labour charges for the shifting of the stay as proposed by the respondent within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this order and communicated along with a notice to the appellant. It is also directed to complete the work without any further delay from the date on which the appellant remit the amount as per estimate. In case of any objections, the respondent is free to take action under Rule 3(b) the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 and obtain necessary permission from the District Magistrate. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The CGRF order No. 116/2017-18 dated 09-01-2018 is modified to this extent. No order on costs.
P/007/2018 - Smt. P.S. Sindhu, Thiruvananthapuram


The grievance of the appellant is against the erection of a transformer in front of her property and a stay in the property by the respondent without any consent. She alleges that her neighbour’s ill motive is behind this action. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF, Kottarakkara, which was disposed of with a direction to remove the previously erected HT stay from the petitioner’s property, if feasible vide order No. OP/520/ 2017 dated 21-12-2017. The Forum also held that the transformer was erected under voltage improvement scheme and the shifting of the transformer is not feasible. Not satisfied with the order of the Forum, the appellant approached this Authority with this appeal. In view of the above discussions, the existing stay in the property of the appellant shall be made closer to the compound wall as proposed by the respondent, at KSEBL’s cost.Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs.
P/006/2018 - Sri. C.P. Paul Ernakulam


The appellant is running a hotel in the name and style ‘Paulson Park Hotel’ having consumer number 5481 under the jurisdiction of College Section, Ernakulam. Based on a Government policy of giving more facilities to promote Tourism in Kerala, Tourism was given equal status of industry and as such the electricity tariff of those hotels that got approval was assigned LT IV- industrial tariff since 6/1987. The appellant's hotel was classified as a star hotel by the tourism department with effect from 01-08-988 for a period of 3 years and a certificate was issued by the competent authority to that effect and the power supply to the appellant's hotel was being charged under LT-IV category. The concessional tariff under LT IV claimed subsequently was not supported by any certificate issued by the Tourism Department for availing concessional tariff applicable to the industries in the hotel business. The tariff assigned to the appellant’s hotel was changed to LT VII A Tariff retrospectively for the period during which eligibility certificate was not tendered. The appellant aggrieved by the action on the part of the respondent in classifying them under LT VII A Tariff, approached Hon'ble High Court vide OP No. 5980 of 1998 which was finally disposed of by the Hon'ble Court vide judgment dated 18-03-2005, directing the appellant to produce eligibility certificate from the Tourism Department within one month. Thereafter the eligibility certificate for the period from 22-08-1996 to 22-08-1999 was produced. In pursuance of the judgment in OP No. 5980/1998 a bill for Rs. 1,15,86,310/- dated 18-06-2005 was issued to the appellant for the period from 8/1991 to 8/1996 and from 15-05-1999 to 4/2005 under LT VII A Tariff. Later, the Govt. reversed the order and withdrew the concession of low rate industrial tariff granted to hotels with effect from 15-05-1999, vide GO.(MS) No.537/200/GAD dated 26-09-2000. The appellant has filed a complaint dated 25/2/2007 before the CGRF, Central Region, Ernakulum challenging the demand dated 3/4/2007 issued by the respondent for a sum of Rs. 1,60,15,422/- including surcharge till date, which was dismissed on the ground that since a WP(C) 21918/05 filed by the appellant on the same subject is pending before the Hon. High Court of Kerala. Aggrieved by the order passed by the CGRF the appellant had filed appeal petition dated 31-08-2007 before this Authority. The appeal was disposed of by ordering that the disputed tariff revision is not justified and hence considered as arbitrary and also held that there is no justification for levy of any penal interest on arrears for which consumer is not responsible; vide order No. 22/2007 of 17-10-2007. The KSEB filed WP(C) 22232/2008 before the Hon’ble High Court challenging the findings rendered by the Ombudsman. The Hon’ble High Court, in its judgment dated 27-11-2013, remanded the matter to this Authority for fresh disposal of the case after affording fresh opportunity of personal hearing to the parties concerned. Accordingly the respondent has produced a copy of the judgment on 22—01-2018. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to quash the short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 1,60,15,422/- issued to the appellant claiming arrears of electricity charges together with surcharges. The respondent is directed to revise the short assessment bill by deducting the surcharge from the calculation statement and issue the revised bill to the consumer within fifteen days. No interest is payable by the consumer up to the due date of the revised bill as ordered now. The consumer may be allowed suitable installments if requested for, but will carry interest for installments from the due date of payment of installments. 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

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