Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 4 of 251
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 752
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman in pdf format
P/031/2018 - Sri. A. Gopakumaran Nair Thiruvananthapuram


The appellant is a consumer under Electrical Section, Thiruvallam and is having two numbers of electric connections with consumer Nos.7509 and 15688 under LTI (A) domestic tariff. The electric connection No. 7509 was originally given during 04/1997 and the electric connection No. 15688 was effected during 2011. The Sub Engineer of Thiruvallam inspected the site and found that the supply with electric connection No. 7509 was used for pumping water for construction purpose and the tariff was changed to LT VII A from 25/10/2017, as there are no domestic activities done by using this supply. The appellant has requested to change the tariff of consumer No. 15688 from domestic to commercial tariff under VII A Tariff and to shift the connection with consumer No. 7509 to the residential building from the masonry wall under deposit work. Since no steps were taken, the consumer filed a complaint before the CGRF, Kottarakkara which was disposed of, holding that the petitioner’s electric connection in consumer number 7509 shall be under LT VI F for construction purpose. Aggrieved by this order of the CGRF, the Appellant has submitted this appeal before this Forum. From the analysis done above and the conclusions arrived at, I take the following decisions. From the conclusions arrived at as detailed above, and under the provisions of the Supply Code, 2014, I am fully convinced that the request of the appellant is not considered reasonably by directing the appellant to submit the required application and the fees and following the procedures. Hence, I decide that the order of the CGRF stands quashed. It is left open to the appellant to approach the authorities of licensee for tariff change and shifting of connection by submitting the applications in the prescribed annexure form along with documents and remitting fees, if he desires so. The respondent shall take proper action as per rules. Having concluded and decided as above it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the Consumer is allowed to the extent as ordered and stands disposed of as such.
P/030/2018 Sri. Paulachan P.P. Ernakulam


Sri Paulachan P.P. is a consumer of electricity of Electrical Section, Kanjoor with Consumer No. 1157479007722 since 04-10-2011 having a connected load of 73 kW and a contract demand of 80 kVA under LT IV ToD tariff. He is running a firm in the name and style of “M/s Penta Pack” in the Mini Industrial Estate, Kanjoor. An inspection was conducted in the premises by the Sub Engineer in the presence of the APTS unit Ernakulam KSEB on 28/10/2017 and detected that one phase of the CT meter was not recording consumption due to the failure of current from the current transformer (CT). Subsequent to the inspection, a provisional demand amounting to Rs. 4,19,344/- was issued to the appellant. The Assessing Officer after the personal hearing denied all objections raised by the appellant and directed to remit the assessed amount vide proceedings dated 10/11/2017. Aggrieved by the decision of the Assistant Engineer, the appellant had filed petition before the CGRF Ernakulum vide OP No. 84/2017-18. From the findings and conclusions arrived at as detailed above, I decide to set aside the short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 4,19,344/- issued to the appellant. The respondent is directed to revise the bills for the consumption for the period from 9-6-2017 to 10/2017 by taking the average consumption of 03/2017, 04/2017 and 05/2017. Accordingly the respondent shall raise a bill for the meter faulty period and issue the revised bill to the consumer within fifteen days. The appellant is also eligible for installments, if requested for, and the respondent shall issue the same. The consumer shall pay the whole amount or the 1st installment within 30 days of the revised bill date. The subsequent installments will bear interest from 30th day of the bill issued to the day of payment. No interest or surcharge is payable by the consumer for the Petition and Appeal pending period before the CGRF and this Authority up to 30th day of the revised bill date. 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. The order of CGRF in OP No. 84/2016-17 dated 31-03-2018 is set aside. No order on costs.
P/028/2018 - Sri. Tomy Njarakulam Ernakulam


The appellant represents, Balanagar Technical Institute, Mookkannoor, Angamaly which was having two numbers of Low Tension electric connections for separate buildings with consumer No.65 under LT-IV and Consumer No. 473 under LT-VI-B with sanctioned load of 52 KW and 45 KW respectively under Electrical Section, Mookkannoor. The appellant is running an educational institution. APTS inspected the premises on 8.2.1999 and alleged that there is additional load of 28 kW in regard to consumer No.65 and alleged that there is unauthorized load of 143 kW to consumer No.473 and thereafter penalty was demanded. The matter was taken up before the Appellate Authority by the appellant and the Authority dismissed the petition. Being aggrieved, the appellant challenged the demands before the Hon. High Court of Kerala vide WP (C) No. 18844 of 2007 and the Court allowed the writ petition fixing the liability only on fixed charges as per judgment dated 22-03-2012. Since the Writ petition was decreed in favor of the appellant, the respondent filed appeal against the judgment and the Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 29-10-2014 in W.A No.294/2014, filed by the KSEB held that, the regulations issued by the KSEB cannot be applied retrospectively and allowed the writ appeal whereby the liability was fixed both on energy charges and fixed charges. Consequent to the demand notices issued, the appellant again approached the Hon'ble High Court challenging the demand dated 22-06-2015 and the Hon'ble High Court as per judgment dated 09-07-2015 in W.P. (C) No. 20511/2015 held that, the appellant can be saddled with liability only from 29-10-2014 to pay the interest and further directed the appellant to pay the amount in 4 equal monthly installments. The judgment dated 09-07-2015 in W.P.(C)No.20511/ 2015 was challenged before the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court by the KSEB as W.A.No.1330/2014 and the Division Bench allowed the writ appeal filed by the KSEB and directed to reconsider the entire matter. Again the appellant filed RP.No.55/2017 against the judgment dated 07-10-2016 in W.A. No.1330/2014 and the Division Bench allowed the review and directed to grant the benefit of the Board Order dated 17-02-2012 to settle the entire liability. Accordingly the respondent issued a demand notice to the appellant, demanding a sum of Rs. 21,13,492/-. The appellant filed an objection against this demand and considering the objection the demand was reduced to Rs. 17,12,123/- by the respondent. There upon the appellant filed a complaint before the CGRF, Ernakulam, which was disposed of, by directing the respondent to collect the arrear amount excluding the compounding interest and to allow one time settlement as ordered by the Hon. High Court, vide order No. OP73/2017-18 dated 31-03-2018. Aggrieved by the order of the CGRF, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Forum. Since in this case, the grievance has arisen out of the detection of unauthorized load and the penal assessment made under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003, it is clear that the petition itself is not maintainable before the CGRF or the Electricity Ombudsman as per the KSERC Regulations. That is any dispute or complaints pertaining to such matters are not maintainable before the CGRF and Electricity Ombudsman, as per Clause 2(1)(f)(vii)(1) of KSERC (CGRF & Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005. The Hon High Court of Kerala has also made it clear in the Catholic Reformation Literature Society Vs. KSEB [2011 (1) KHC 457] that, when there is specific provisions in the Act itself, to hear such cases, the same are excluded from the purview of CGRF and hence before the Electricity Ombudsman. Hence I decide that the Appeal Petition filed before this Authority by the appellant is not maintainable. The appellant is free to approach the licensee for a one time settlement or to file an appeal against the final assessment of the Assessing Officer, under Section 127 of Electricity Act, 2003. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellants’ stands disposed of with the said decisions. 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