Downloads
Overview Search Downloads Submit file Up
Category: Orders
Page 260 of 427
Order by: Default | Name | Date | Hits | [Descending]
Orders Files: 1280
Orders of Kerala Electricity Ombudsman  in pdf format
Files:
P/022/2016 Smt. Pathumma Malappuram

Download 
Download
The appellant, Smt. Pathumma, is an applicant of electric connection for her newly constructed house under the jurisdiction of Electrical Section, Venniyoor. She applied for electric connection after remitting Rs. 50.00 as application fee and Rs. 100.00 as processing fee on 09-10-2015. But the respondent denied her request alleging that the premises requires for new service connection was detected for theft of electricity and subsequently issued penal charges for an amount of Rs. 46,180.00 as per Section 126 of Electricity Act, 2003. According to the respondent as there is a case pending against the appellant in connection with theft of electricity and an amount of Rs. 46,180.00 is still pending towards the penalty, the service connection could not be given to the appellant. Aggrieved against the stand taken against the issuance of new service connection by the respondent, the appellant approached the CGRF, Kozhikode, with a petition. But the CGRF disposed of the petition vide order in OP No.108/2015-2016 dated 02-03-2016 with the following decisions: 1. The respondents shall effect supply to the petitioner, premise, only after the petitioner remits Rs. 46,180.00 and on proper application, as per existing statutes. 2. The petitioner will be eligible to claim refund for the above amount if and only if he is acquitted by the lawful authority from theft charges. 3. The respondents shall strictly comply with Regulation 160 sub regulation (7) to (10), while effecting supply. 4. Petition allowed accordingly. Not satisfied with the above decisions of CGRF, the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority. In view of the above discussions the respondent is directed to issue service connection to the new building after complying with all the formalities and after realization of the penal bill for Rs. 46,180.00. I am not making any opinion regarding the criminal case registered against Sri Abdul Salam as per Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003 since the matter is pending before the competent Judicial Forum. The appeal petition is disposed of accordingly. The order of CGRF in OP No.108/2015-2016 dated 02-03-2016 is upheld. No order as to costs.
P/023/2016 Sri. P. Yoosaf, Palakkad.

Download 
Download
The appellant is an industrial consumer having consumer number 6662 under Electrical Section, Pulamanthole in Malappuram District. The appellant has requested enhancement of his connected load to 71 kW and accordingly capacity of existing transformer enhanced to 160 kVA after sanctioning OYEC instalment scheme. He had remitted 10% of the transformer cost amounting to Rs. 43,390.00 and the balance was being levied from him on monthly basis. According to the appellant he had remitted an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs approximately towards the cost of transformer in excess of the actual expenditure incurred for installation of transformer. Hence the appellant preferred a petition before the CGRF with a plea to refund the excess amount remitted which was not allowed by the Forum in its order OP No.106/2015-16 dated 02-03-2016. Against the above order of CGRF, the appellant has filed this appeal petition before this Authority. Though the appellant claimed that he remitted an amount of Rs. 3,00,000.00 approximately towards the charges for the enhancement of transformer, he failed to produce the remittance details such as copy of monthly bills issued and its remittances or any other documents to prove his arguments. Hence this Authority is not in a position to verify the genuineness of the argument put forward by the appellant. Since the appellant failed to produce any evidence to prove his claim of excess remittance, I do not find any reason to intervene in the matter at this stage In view of the above it can be seen that the appellant submitted the appeal without furnishing any reason or explanation or even without any documents to prove his argument of excess remittances. In this background the appeal petition is found not sustainable and hence dismissed. The order of CGRF in OP No. 106/2015-16 dated 02-03-2016 is upheld. No order as to costs.
P/024/2016 Sri. Sunil Kumar, Thiruvananthapuram.

Download 
Download
Sri Prabhakaran, Kurumbi Veedu, Attapuram, Kulathoor, Uchakada and five other consumers with consumer Nos. 10407, 10651, 10655, 10581, 10686 and 10748 under Electrical Section, Parassala had approached CGRF (South), Kottarakkara with a petition stands numbered as 1622/2015 requesting not to disconnect their service connections until the disposal of OS 456/2010 by the Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara. The service connections were given to the above consumers on the basis of ownership certificate issued by the Secretary, Kulathoor Grama Panchayath. Meanwhile, Sri Sunil Kumar, Padmanabha Soudam, Kulathoor, appellant in this petition, raised a complaint on 26-09-2014 before the Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Kattakkada stating that the service connections in question were obtained illegally on production of fake ownership certificate. Hence he requested to dismantle the service connections mentioned above. Regulation 22 (d) states that “Maintainability of the Complaint‐ (1) no representation to the Ombudsman shall lie in case where a representation for the same grievance by the complainant is pending in any proceedings before any Court, tribunal or arbitrator or any other authority or a decree or award or a final order has already been passed by any such Court, tribunal, arbitrator or authority”. So in view of the above discussions, I hold that the appeal is not maintainable. In the above circumstances it is concluded that the appeal is not maintainable and hence dismissed. No order as to 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_counterToday2414
mod_vvisit_counterAll5355856