Downloads
Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 242 of 433
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 1297
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
Files:
P/016/2017 Sri. Muhammed Rafeeque M.A. Mudickal P.O., Perumbavoor

Download 
Download
The appellant, Sri Muhammed Rafeeque M.A., is an industrial consumer with consumer No. 12042 having connected load of 47 kW under Electrical Section, Vazhakulam. On 16-03-2016, the APTS of KSEB conducted a surprise inspection in the above premises and found that voltage of R phase (out of 3 phases) was missing in the energy meter due to fault in the connection to the meter. When one phase voltage being not sensed by the energy meter, the energy recorded would be only 2/3rd of the actual consumption. Hence the appellant was served with a short assessment bill for an amount of Rs. 2,92,664.00 on 19-03-2016. In order to recover the charges for the unrecorded portion of energy, the assessment was made for the period of seven months, when the meter was found recording less than the actual consumption. The appellant lodged complaint before the Assessing officer, the Assistant Engineer, against the said assessment, on 26-05-2016 which was disposed of with a direction to remit the assessed amount before 05-09-2016. Being not satisfied with the decision of the Assistant Engineer, the appellant approached the CGRF, Central Region, Ernakulam, with Petition No. OP 66/2016-17 and the Forum also dismissed the petition vide its order dated 31-12-2016. Feeling aggrieved against the decision of the Forum, the appellant has submitted the appeal petition before this Authority. Here in this case, the non recording of one phase of the energy meter in the appellant’s premises was detected by the respondent during the inspection conducted on 16-03-2016 but the appellant was charged only for 7 months instead of 12 months as per the above Regulation. The actual consumption recorded in the meter itself was taken for assessing the unrecorded portion of energy. The increase in consumption recorded after the rectification of defects clearly indicates and justifies the respondent’s claim that the appellant was undercharged for the period from 09/2015 onwards. So, a probable conclusion can be arrived at in this case is that the voltage of ‘R’ phase was missing from September 2015 onwards as per the downloaded data. Under the above circumstances the short assessment issued by the respondent is found in order. In view of the above factual and legal position, I don’t find any reason to interfere with the short assessment bill dated 19-03-2016 issued for Rs. 2,92,664.00. Hence the appeal is dismissed. The order of CGRF in OP No. CGRF-CR/Comp.66/2016-17 dated 31-12-2016 is upheld. No order as to costs.
P/007/2017 Sri M.J. Thomas, Maradu,, Ernakulam

Download 
Download
The appellant, Sri M.J. Thomas, is a HT consumer having a three phase connection with consumer code LCN2/6664 under Electrical Section, Maradu under HT IV tariff. On 13-05-2016, the HT Meter Test Unit of KSEB conducted an inspection in the premises of the appellant and it was found that there is current failure on ‘R’ phase from 23-08-2014 onwards. On detailed examination it was revealed that the ‘R’ phase in the CT meter was faulty and a flash mark is seen on the ‘R’ phase PT bush. Further, the respondent issued direction to the appellant to replace both CT and PT. The appellant was issued with a short assessment bill amounting to Rs. 5,05,159.00 on 29-08-2016, for the meter faulty period from 8/2014 to 04/2016. Aggrieved by this, the appellant approached the CGRF, Ernakulam by filing a Complaint No. 72/2016-17. The CGRF dismissed the petition holding that the short assessment bill dated 29-08-2016 for Rs. 5,05,159.00 was in order. Feeling aggrieved against the above decisions of CGRF the appellant has approached this Authority with this appeal petition. In the instant case, it is proved beyond doubt that one phase of the energy meter was missing from 23-08-2014 and thus the appellant has actually consumed the energy, the short assessment bill issued for the period from 8/2014 to 04/2016 as per Regulation 152(3) is found in order. It is also found that the short assessment bill is calculated based on the average consumption of previous 3 months and the consumption after replacing the CT/PT is higher than the previous average. Hence the appellant is liable to remit the amount without any interest. In view of the above factual and legal position, I don’t find any reason to interfere with the short assessment bill issued dated 29-08-2016 for Rs. 5,05,159.00. Hence the appeal is dismissed. The order of CGRF in OP No CGRF-CR/Comp./72-2016-17/475 dated 21-12-2016 is upheld. No order as to costs.
REVIEW PETITION NO. P/058/2016 Sri. C.P. Paul Ernakulam

Download 
Download
The review appellant is running a hotel in the name and style ‘Paulson Park Hotel’ having consumer number 5481 under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section, College, Ernakulam. On 5-9-2001, the review appellant had submitted an application before the Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, College, Ernakulam for conversion of existing LT service connection to HT, after remitting the required application fee and after complying with all necessary formalities. The review appellant had executed an OYEC agreement with the Assistant Executive Engineer for the HT supply on 03-05-2002 and remitted an amount of Rs. 2,84,400.00 towards cash deposit for power allocation to the extent of 180 kVA with a contract demand of 150 kVA as per the application submitted for HT supply. The grievance of the review appellant is that the inordinate delay to provide HT service connection had resulted in bringing to a halt of functioning of the hotel, which consequently resulted in default in payment of electricity charges and subsequently dismantlement of connection. The review appellant approached the CGRF requesting to treat him as a deemed HT consumer with effect from 05-09-2001 till dismantling of the service and further claiming a sum of Rs.1,63,71,357.00 towards loss and damages suffered by the appellant on account of non conversion of the service connection from LT to HT category. But the CGRF dismissed the petition as it is found no merit in the contentions of the review appellant; vide order no. 30/2006-07 dated 10-12-2007. Aggrieved by the order passed by the CGRF the review appellant filed appeal petition before this Authority which was disposed of with a direction to treat the review appellant as deemed HT consumer with effect from 08-02-2003 to 16-05-2006 vide order No. 02/2008 of 14-3-2008. 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. The Hon’ble High Court in the common judgment dated 27-11-2013 in WP (C) Nos. 20445 and 26745 of 2008 have directed this Authority to dispose of Appeal Petition No P/002/2008 afresh. Accordingly this Authority has considered the reliefs sought for in the original appeal filed by the appellant in P/002/2008 and disposed of the case. Now the relief claimed in the review petition is for a different matter. If the review appellant is aggrieved by the order of this Authority, it is free for him to challenge that order before the appropriate authority. Here there is no mistake apparent on the face of records is pointed out or anything which was not brought out before this Authority when the case was decided so as to review the order. In this background, this Authority didn’t find any reason to intervene the order already issued. In view of the above discussions, I hold that review petition is not maintainable as there is no cause or sufficient reason established by the review appellant, for the review of the order already issued. Hence the review petition is dismissed and disposed of accordingly.
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_counterToday4753
mod_vvisit_counterAll5602501