Downloads
Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 159 of 422
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 1265
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
Files:
REVIEW PETITION No. 01/2019 IN APPEAL PETITION NO. P/081/2018 Dr. Shaheen C. Malappuram

Download 
Download
The review appellant approached the respondent for shifting an electric pole situated in his property. Since no action was taken in the matter, the appellant approached the CGRF with the request for shifting the pole from his property to the PWD area, which was disposed of by order dated 23-08-2018 as “(1) The respondent shall shift the electric pole situated in the property of the review petitioner to the proposed location under deposit work within the stipulated time. (2) The respondent shall consider the request of the review petitioner to shift the pole within his property, subject to the feasibility, so as to reduce the expenditure”. Not satisfied with the decision of CGRF, the review petitioner has filed appeal against the order of CGRF, Kozhikode, before this Authority which was dismissed by upholding the decision of the CGRF, vide order No. P/081/2018 dated17-12-2018 of this Authority. Still aggrieved by the decision, the review appellant has submitted this review petition with a plea to review the orders and to allow the reliefs sought for. The request of the review appellant is to minimize the amount made under Deposit Work by avoiding the insertion of pole in the existing line. As per respondent the insertion of pole cannot be avoided as the line can only be shifted by drawing the line from the pole to be inserted, otherwise there will not be vertical clearance. No glaring mistake or apparent errors on the face of record, on the order dated 17-12--2018 of this Authority, in Appeal Petition No. P/081/2018, were pointed out by the review appellant here. In the review petition nothing is pointed out which escaped the notice of this Authority while disposing the appeal petition. The review jurisdiction is limited to rectify a mistake or an error which is apparent on the face of records and it cannot be used as appellate jurisdiction. In view of the above discussions, I hold that review petition is not maintainable as this Authority didn’t find any reason to intervene the order already issued. Hence the review petition is dismissed and disposed of accordingly.
P/091/2018 Smt. Pennamma Varghese Alappuzha

Download 
Download
The appellant having the domestic service connection bearing consumer number 1501 under Electrical Section, Kuthiathode had filed a complaint before the CGRF, Ernakulam requesting to shift the electric line drawn near to the roof of her residence which was shifted from the neighbour’s property recently by the respondent. The CGRF, Ernakulam, dismissed the petition vide order No. 51/2018 dated 22-12-2018, as it is found that the existing two line cross arm in the electric post is replaced by four line cross arm and at present the horizontal and vertical clearance from the residence building is as per existing rules and regulations. Aggrieved by the order of the CGRF, the appellant has submitted this appeal petition before this Forum. From the analysis done above and the conclusions arrived at, the appeal Petition No. P/091/2018 filed by the appellant stands dismissed as it is found not maintainable before this Authority. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs.
P/092/2018 Sri. Joseph Mathew Kottayam

Download 
Download
The appellant is a consumer under Electrical Section, Pampady having consumer number 15340 under tariff LT VI D with connected load of 5660 watts. A penal bill for Rs. 1,15,995/- was issued to the appellant after an inspection conducted by the APTS, KSEBL on 16-06-2018. It is found in the inspection that the service connection availed under LT VI D was misused for domestic purposes for which tariff under LT I A with higher rate is applicable and also connected unauthorized additional load of 10214 over and above the the sanctioned load of 5660 watts. The appellant filed a complaint before the CGRF, Kottarakkara against the assessment made under Section 126 of Electricity Act 2003. According to the respondent, the matter of the complaint is an assessment under Section 126 of the Act and the CGRF is barred from entertaining such complaints in view of regulation 2 (1) (f) (vii) (1) of the KSERC (CGRF and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005. Accordingly the Forum held that it was improper to entertain the complaint and directed the appellant to approach the Appellate Authority, vide order No.103/2018 dated 10-10-2018. But without complying the said order of CGRF, this appeal petition was filed before this Authority. In view of the above factual position I don’t find any reason to interfere with the findings and decision taken by the CGRF, Kottrakkara in this case and hence the order of CGRF No. 103/2018 dated 10-10-2018 is upheld. Having concluded and decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. No order on costs
Back

Contact Us

KERALA ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN
D.H. Road & Foreshore Road Junction,
Near Gandhi Square,
Ernakulam, Kerala-682 016
Ph: 0484 2346488, Mob: 8714356488

Any Queries?

Send an email to info@keralaeo.org

Do you Know?

Consumers should submit  petitions to CGRF first before appealing Ombudsman.

Visitors Counter

mod_vvisit_counterToday190
mod_vvisit_counterAll5098317