CONSUMER GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM NORTHERNREGION, . (Formed under section 42(5) of Electricity Act 2003.) Vydyuthibhavan, Gandhi Road, Kozhikode -673011 Telephone Number -0495 2367820 [email protected]

PRESENT

BEENA GOPINATH. S : CHAIRPERSON LEKHA RANI R : MEMBER ROBIN PETER : MEMBER

OP NO.101/2020-21

PETITIONERS :-

1. K P M Crystal Palace, 5/2037/E3, 64/2117,2118, Opp: Sarovaram Bio Park, Eranhipalam, Kozhikode. RESPONDENTS :-

1. Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB Ltd, , Kozhikode District.

2. The Special Officer, Revenue, KSEB Ltd., Pattom, Thiruvanathapuram.

ORDER

Case of the Petitioner:-

The complainant is a High Tension consumer bearing Con. No. LCN/30/8919, having a contract demand of 210KVA. The complainant is running a hotel in the name and style “KPM Tripenta Hotel” and the visitors of the hotel were mainly in and outside . The consumer had paid the electricity charges regularly without fail till the outbreak of the pandemic COVID 19.

Owing to restrictions imposed upon the outbreak of Covid 19, tourists and visitors deserted travelling and as a result the hotel was in complete lock down. Owing to the fear of spreading the pandemic, usual guests and foreign tourists were reluctant to stay in the hotel. This has drastically reduced the business.

During the initial months of Covid 19, eventhough the hotel was in total lockdown state, the electrical appliances like centralized air conditioners, geysers, lifts etc could not be put in switch off mode for long period due to fear of heavy maintenance work. Moreover due to the fear of rodents, the equipments were run occasionally. Another reason for current consumption was the stay of the staff from other states in the hotel.

The average consumption of the hotel for the past 6 months during the pre Covid period was 59662.5 units. This has been significantly reduced to 8691 units during May 2020 (billed in June 2020). The maximum

2 demand was dropped to 10KVA from 45 KVA & 50 KVA during the previous months. Thus the impact of Covid 19 in the business was severe.

Apart from the consumption during the period, there was no business carried out and hence all revenue came to a standstill. Hence it became intricate to pay the electricity bills in time which accumulated to Rs.33,29,860/-. As a relief measure to combat Covid 19, the KSEBL has announced the waiver of 25% of the fixed charges for commercial consumers for the months of March, April and May 2020 and to defer the payment of balance fixed charges upto December 2020 without levying interest.

The eligible rebate was not allowed. The following table shows the demand charges from 1/2020 to 12/2020.

Month Billing Demand Demand charges

KVA Rs.

1/2020 162 71,280

2/2020 160 70,400

3/2020 158 69,520

4/2020 158 69,520

5/2020 158 69,520

6/2020 158 69,520

69,5207/2020 158 69,520

8/2020 158 69,520

3

9/2020 158 69,520

10/2020 158 69,520

11/2020 158 69,520

12/2020 163 71,720

From the table it can be seen that from March 2020 to November 2020, the billing demand was 158 KVA. The billing demand when multiplied by the demand charges of Rs.440/- oer KVA gives Rs.69,520/-. Hence it can be noticed that the eligible 25% rebate on demand charges were not extended to the complainant during the months of March, April & May 2020.The demand charges during these months should be Rs.51,920/-,as per the Board Order. Hence an eligible rebate of Rs.1,55,760/- towards 3 months @ 51,920 per month is to be deducted. As per B.O, the balance 75% of the demand charges was deferred till December 2020 to recover from the financial stringency. But the 1st OP has issued an arrear notice on 30.10.2020 instructing to remit the arrears of Rs.28,95,145/- in lump. The total arrear shown in the bill of December 2020 is Rs.33,29,860/-.The complainant request to allow 24 monthly interest free installments to remit the arrears; else, he is forced to close the business permanently.

Hence the petitioner puts forward the following requests before the Forum.

1. Rebate as per the Board Order may be allowed in fixed charges for the

months of April, May and June 2020.

4

2. Demand charges may be reduced to 75% in all months where billing

demand did not exceed 75% of the connected load.

3. 24 interest free installments may be allowed to remit the arrears upto

December 2020.

4. Such other relief that may be prayed for at the time of hearing.

Version by the respondent:-

All the averments of the petitioner are denied unless they are explicitly admitted.

Registered name of the petitioner is KPM Crystal Palace in the records.

Consumption for the corresponding month of previous year (5/2019) was also lower than that in 5/2020. As per Regulation 2(56), Electricity Supply Code 2014, maximum demand means the highest average load measured in KvA or KW at the point of supply of the consumer during a consecutive period of 30 minutes or such other consecutive period as specified by the Commission during a billing cycle. In view of the above definition, the maximum demand of the petitioner for the month of May 2020 was not 10KvA but 32.71 KvA.

As far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no drastic drop in consumption except for the month of 5/2020 in the year 2020. A detail of consumption in the year 2020 is enclosed.

The petitioner is bound to pay demand charges for 75% of the contract demand even when supply is disconnected as per agreement. The

5

petitioner has admitted that the firm has used electricity and bills issued were according to the consumption.

As per Regulation 2(44), Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2014, fixed charge means the charge levied as per provisions of the tariff order issued for the licensee by the commission.

In the wake of general condition 1 under Part A of the Tariff Order dated 8.7.2019, the minimum charge payable by all LT consumers shall be the fixed charge or demand charge as the case may be of the respective category even during the period of disconnection.

In the light of general condition 6 under Part B of the tariff order dated 8.7.2019, the monthly minimum charge payable shall be the minimum guarantee amount as per minimum guarantee agreement, if any, or the billing demand as per condition 2, whichever is higher. This applies even during the period of disconnection of power supply.

As per condition 2 under Part B of the tariff order dated 8.7.2019, billing demand shall be the recorded maximum demand for the month in KvA or 75% of the contract demand as per the agreement whichever is higher.

Given the facts mentioned above, the benefit allowed to the petitioner having contract demand of 210 KvA in conformity with Board Order dated 30.05.2020 is tabulated below.

6

Sl Month Billing RMD(KvA) 755 of Billing Rate Demand No date contract demand(KvA) charge demand

1 12/19 3.1.20 162.43 157.5 162 440 71280

2 1/20 4.2.20 159.77 157.5 160 440 70400

3 2/20 5.3.20 166 157.5 166 440 73040

4 3/20 3.4.20 157.41 157.5 158 440 69520

5 4/20 2.5.20 112.77 157.5 158 440 69520

6 5/20 2.6.20 32.71 157.5 158 440 69520

7 6/20 3.7.20 136.98 157.5 158 440 69520

8 7/20 4.8.20 99.66 157.5 158 440 69520

9 8/20 4.9.20 101.97 157.5 158 440 69520

10 9/20 5.10.20 133.5 157.5 158 440 69520

11 10/20 4.11.20 140.91 157.5 158 440 69520

12 11/20 2.12.20 163.35 157.5 163 440 71720

In the wake of the Board Order dated 30.5.2020, rebate of 25% on fixed charge applicable to the petitioner for the period of 3/2020 to 5/2020 is Rs.52,140/- (69520*25/100*3) and the same was adjusted against the subsequent bill dated 3.7.2020. Hence the contention of the petitioner in this regard is false.

7

It is true that the arrear bill was served on the petitioner since the petitioner, who was only eligible for deferment of payment of 75% of the fixed charge for the period from 3/2020 to 5/2020 upto 15.12.2020 in line with Board Order dated 30.5.2020, defaulted payment of current charges for the remaining period too.

As far as the interest on arrear due from petitioner is concerned, KSEBL follows Regulation 131(2), Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2014, by which KSEBL is bound to accept arrear with interest at the rate specified in the schedule of miscellaneous charges as per Schedule 1 of the Code.

PRAYER

1. The petitioner was already allowed a rebate of 25% of fixed charge for the period from 3/2020 to 5/2020 vide bill dated 3.7.2020. 2. Demand charges have been billed only for 75% of the contract demand where demand was below 75% of the contract demand. 3. No request has been submitted by the petitioner in this regard so far. 4. No relief other than that has been offered vide Board Order dated 30.5.2020 can be allowed to the petitioner.

Discussion, analysis and findings:-

The hearing of the case was conducted on 05.02.2021 at CGRF court hall, Kozhikode. The representative of the petitioner and representatives of 1st and 2nd respondents attended the hearing.

8

Having considered all the documents submitted and deliberations during the hearing, the Forum has come to the following conclusions leading to the decision:-

The petitioner is an HT consumer bearing No. LCN/30/8919 with contract demand 210 KVA and registered in the name “KPM Crystal Palace”, Kozhikode. Due to declaration of lock down in 3/2020 and continued situation due to precaution against the pandemic, the hotel business drastically fell down. The petitioner stopped payment of energy charges from 3/2020 upto 12/2020.

Licensee issued a total arrear bill amounting to Rs.28,95,145/- in 10/2020.

Aggrieved by that the petitioner approached this Forum with the following prayers.

1. Allow eligible rebate as per orders of KSEBL

2. Reduce the demand charges to 75% of contract demand in all

months.

3. Allow 24 interest free installments.

4. Such other relief prayed at the time of hearing.

According to the respondent, the eligible rebates were already allowed to the petitioner. Demand charges have been billed for 75% of contract demand in all months when the maximum demand recorded was below that. The petitioner has not requested for installment facility for remitting the arrear.

9

The issue to be decided in this case is the modality of calculating demand charges in case the consumer’s premises was near to a close down situation due to reasons beyond his control.

The clause of the agreement executed by the consumer with KSEBL narrates the way of calculation in such situation.

Relevant portions of clauses 16(b) and 18(b)(iii) of the supply of energy agreement (HT) are reproduced as here under.

Clause 16(b): In cases where the consumer is unable to consume energy, due to lockout, strike of employees of the consumer, major breakdown of machinery or plant, which to the satisfaction of the Licensee is responsible for the non-consumption of energy by the consumer, or other force majeure conditions over which the consumer has no control but shall resume consumption of energy as soon as he reasonably can, he shall promptly intimate the Licensee the reasons for such non- consumption. In any event the consumer shall be bound to pay to the Licensee the fixed minimum charge as approved by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission, irrespective of the question as to whether any energy has been consumed or not, whatever be the reason for non-consumption and also irrespective of the actual quantity consumed.

Clause 18 (b)(iii) : The monthly minimum applicable shall be demand charges for 75 percent of the contract demand increased as per agreement for each working month.

10

The argument of the petitioner that regulation 60 of KESC 2014 is applicable in this case is not found admissible as the matter relates to application for new service connection.

The petitioner contents that the energy consumption was very low when compared to the billed demand (75% of maximum demand) during lock down period and the consumer is unnecessarily forced to pay the high amount. Hence the petitioner requested to consider the recorded maximum demand for calculation of fixed charges instead of fixing it as 75% of contract demand since there is considerable reduction in recorded maximum demand during the period of dispute.

Even though it is a true fact that the consumer faced financial hardships due to non-running of the business, KSEBL has provided electric supply to the premises and as per the law established for the non use of energy by the consumer, the licensee can not suffer loss of revenue.

The petitioner’s situation is a general issue to all consumers and eligible rebate was already allowed.

If the petitioner wanted to reduce the contract demand foreseeing the situation, he could have applied for reduction in contract demand.

Thus the Forum do not find anything wrong in the action taken from the respondent’s side.

The relief sought in the petition vide items 1 and 2 are thus found devoid of any merit to consider and hence dismissed.

The relief noted as items 3 and 4 shall be allowed as a special case. The respondent shall collect the arrear amount in 15 equal installments

11 and the installment shall carry interest as per regulation 131 (2) of KESC 2014. The petitioner need not pay interest for the bill amount for the petition pending period before this Forum.

As concluded and decided as above, the petition is disposed off accordingly.

DECISION:-

The petition is allowed to the extent ordered.

Dated this the 20th day of Feb, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Robin Peter Lekha Rani R Beena Gopinath.S Member Member Chairperson. Endt.on CGRF-NR/OP 101/2020-21/ 341 / 20 . 2 . 2021 . 1) K P M Crystal Palace, If the petitioner is not satisfied with the above order of this 5/2037/E3, Forum, he is at liberty to prefer appeal before the State 64/2117., 2118 Electricity Ombudsman, Charangattu Bhavan Building No. Opp: Sarovaram Bio Park 34/895, Mamangalam- Anchumana Road, Edappally, Cochin – Eranhipalam 682024 (Ph: 0484 2346488) within 30 days from date of Kozhikode receipt of this order.

2) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB Ltd, Karaparamba, Kozhikode District. Copy submitted to:- Chief Engineer (Distribution – North), Kozhikode. Copy to: 1. The Secretary, KSEB Ltd., Vydyuthibhavanam, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Kozhikode, Kozhikode District. 3. The Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Kozhikode KSEB Ltd, Kozhikode District. Forwarded 4. The Special Officer, Revenue, Sd/- KSEB Ltd, Pattom, Thiruvanathapuram Chairperson 12