STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ORDER OF THE CONSUMERS’ GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM, CENTRAL REGION, ERNAKULAM

(Present (1) Sri.P.K.Abdul Jabbar, Chairperson, (2) Smt.Jyothy.P.V, Member (3) Sri. Sasidharan Unnithan Member

Petitioner Shri. N. Chellappan, Sreeganam Saw Mill& Wood Industries, Nedukulanji, P.O, Nooranad, . PIN- 690 529.

Respondent 1) The Asst. Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB, Charummood.

2) The Asst. Engineer, Electrical Section, KSEB, Nooranad.

======No.CGRF-CR/Comp. 125/2009-10/ Dated: 9/3/10

ORDER

Shri. N. Chellappan, Sreeganam Saw Mill & Wood Industries, Nedukulanji, Padanilam P.O, Nooranad, Alappuzha District. PIN- 690 529. (Cons. No. 7394 under Ele. Sec., Nooranad) filed a complaint before this Forum on 22/12/09.

In the petition, along with other points, the petitioner stated that the petitioner’s energy meter was burnt due to some technical falls on 1/10/09. He immediately reported the same to the KSEB. He was informed that no meter is available due to scarcity of meters. As advised by the respondent he purchased a meter and it was installed on 12/10/09 only. He prayed for the refund of the following amounts paid/spent by him:

i) Cost of meter - Rs. 6110/- ii) Cost of cable - Rs. 4353/- iii) Testing fee - Rs. 1260/- iv) Labour - Rs. 3703/------Total Rs.15426/- ======2

Subsequently, the Statement of Facts from the Asst. Executive Engineer, Charumood was called for. The same was filed on 8/1/2010.

In the Statement of Facts, along with other points, the AEE stated that based on the Compt. No. 125 filed by the petitioner inspection was carried out at the premises of the consumer. The consumer has a connected load of 33 KW and hence CT meter was required for replacing the faulty metering equipment. In order to avoid the normal procedural delay the consumer expressed his willingness to provide CT meter at his own expense without any compulsion from KSEB to purchase. The consumer had remitted only Rs. 6300/- as ACD at the time of enhancing the connected load. The amount of Rs. 3703/- was collected under work deposit towards labour and supervision charges for replacing the faulty meter with new CT connection with higher size cable required in the premises. An amount of Rs. 1260/- was collected as testing fee of the meter to the TMR Division of KSE Board, Pallom which is mandatory. When the consumer supplies the meter no amount is collected from the consumer on account of the meter rent. The consumer even furnished the requisite undertaking in stamp paper when the meter was supplied by the consumer. The amount required in executing works of this nature as per prevailing rules in the KSEB, which the consumer is bound to pay, only was collected from the consumer under work deposit. Hence the KSEB is not liable to pay any amount to the consumer.

The petitioner was afforded an opportunity of being heard on 17/2/2010. During the hearing, the Petitioner and the Respondent re- iterated the main points in their respective written versions. The petitioner filed an Argument Note on 17/2/2010. In the Argument Note, along with other points, the petitioner stated even after changing the meter at the petitioner’s cost, it is not fair/just to collect the meter rent from him. He also prayed that the respondent should provide him copies of “labour data” and Estimate. The respondent filed Reply to Petitioner’s Argument Note on 24/2/2010. He also produced Estimate of the work. A copy of the same was also earmarked by the respondent for the petitioner. In the Reply, along with other points, a rent of Rs. 10/- per month for the single phase meter supplied by the KSEB for lighting load of the consumer is only recovered by the consumer now.

Heard. On examining the petition, the statement of facts of Respondent, Argument Note of the petitioner and the Reply by AEE, perusing all the documents of both sides, and considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Forum comes to the following conclusions and decisions thereof.

3

The energy meter of the petitioner was burnt on 1/10/09. As new meters were not available with the KSEB at that time, the burnt meter was replaced at the cost of the consumer, who purchased the meter. The petitioner is challenging the bill for Rs. 15426/- incurred by the KSEB for replacement of the meter under various heads.

The respondent has very specific explanations for realization of the amounts under various heads. As the meter belongs to the petitioner, no meter rent is chargeable. Ipso facto no refund is admissible. Similarly the cost of the cable is to be borne by the consumer as per rules. Again the consumer is to bear the testing fee of the meter. The labour charge claimed by the Respondent is also in order.

The complaint is devoid of any merits and is not allowed.

The petitioner is at liberty to file appeal before the Hon’ble Electricity Ombudsman within 30 days of receipt of this order, if the petitioner is not satisfied with this decision.

The petition is disposed off accordingly.

Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010

Sd/- 1) Sri.P.K.Abdul Jabbar (CHAIRPERSON)

Sd/- 2) Smt.Jyothy.P.V Member

Sd/- 3) Sri. N. Sasidharan Unnithan Memebr

4

Endt. On CGRF-CR/Comp. 125/2009-2010/ 9/3/2010

To Shri. N. Chellappan, Sreeganam Saw Mill& Wood Industries, Nedukulanji, Padanilam P.O, Nooranad, Alappuzha District. PIN- 690 529.

(By registered post)

Copy Submitted to: (1) The Chief Engineer, Distribution Central, KSEB, Gandhi- Square, DH Road, Kochi-16.

Copy to: - (1) The Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, KSEB, Alappuzha. (2) The Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, KSEB , . (3) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, K.S.E.B. Charummood (4) The Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, KSEB, Nooranad.

CHAIRPERSON