| M/s Hamsaveni Carbides is a HT consumer (Consumer No. HTB‐5/5075) with a contract demand of 500 kVA under Electrical Section, Kanjikode, Palakkad and is represented by Sri. K. A. Abdul Jabbar, Manager. M/s Hamsaveni Carbides was engaged in the manufacture of calcium carbide, which is classified as power intensive unit. Since the consumer has defaulted in paying electricity charges, the connection was disconnected on 11-10-2002. Later, the service connection to the Firm was dismantled on 30-05-2003, as the appellant failed to clear the dues within a period of six months, as per law. The Government grants the benefits of waiver minimum demand charges during the period of disconnection and dismantlement. By pursuing the concessions granted by the State Government for closed industries, the appellant applied for reconnection. The respondent demanded to the appellant to pay the distribution and transmission cost for a new 22 kV feeder and also to pay the proportionate cost for enhancing capacity of 220 kV substation, Kanjikode. The appellant was directed to pay the cost of drawing new feeder in the distribution side and the cost of installing a circuit breaker and a feeder bay inside the substation in the transmission side amounting to Rs. 7,07,562/- and Rs. 14,00,000/- respectively. A sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- was also demanded by the transmission wing towards the proportionate cost for enhancement of the substation capacity. Aggrieved by the above demands, the appellant approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala, by filing a writ petition in W.P.C. No.31193/2012 seeking to quash the above demands raised by the respondent. The appellant has a case in this writ petition that no such amount is payable. The Hon’ble Court held that the remedy of the appellant is to challenge the demand by approaching the Forum provided for raising such complaints. The Writ Petition was dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner to approach the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum as provided under the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission (CGRF and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005.
Accordingly the appellant filed a petition before the CGRF. The CGRF has decided that the complaint itself is not maintainable, as the Forum found that the rates and quantum of works in the estimates are in order and accordingly dismissed the Petition. This appeal petition is filed as the appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 18-01-2017 of CGRF, Kozhikode in OP No. 60/2015-16 on the issue stated above among other things.
From the analysis done and the findings and conclusions arrived at, which are detailed above, I take the following decisions.
The final accounts of each work, for which amount has been collected by KSEB to provide the electric supply to the appellant, may be prepared and the actual cost estimate be arrived at, incorporating the revisions as ordered above by this Forum, within three months of this order and the same shall be communicated appellant. The excess amount if any shall be refunded with interest.
The Order No. OP 60/201-16 dated 18-01-2017, of CGRF Kozhikode, stands modified to this extent.
Having decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. The Appeal Petition filed by the appellant is disposed of with the said decisions taken and issued. No order as to costs. |
|
|
Data
|
| Size |
519.84 KB |
| Downloads |
1148 |
| Created |
2017-06-29 00:00:00 |
|
|
|
Overview
Search Downloads
Submit file
Up
P/039/2017 M/s Hamsaveni Carbides, Kanjikode, Palakkad. 
