CONSUMER GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM NORTHERN REGION, . (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

LEKHARANI. R. : MEMBER II

ROBIN PETER : MEMBER III

OP No.138/2018-19

PETITIONER :

The Manager,Arch Ply N Boards,Kunjathur P.O, Thalappadi, L C N 17/3941,-671323.

RESPONDENTS :

1. Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, ,-671322.

2. Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, KSEB Ltd, , Kasaragod District- 671326. ORDER

Case of the Petitioner:-

The petitioner, Manager, Arch Ply N Boards, Thalappady, Kunjathur,Kasaragod district, comes under the jurisdiction of Electrical section Manjeshwar, complaints that he has been issued with a huge bill(penalty Rs3,16,870+158935) to the tune of Rs4,75,805/- stating that penalty issued is based on meter faulty period. Both the bills were issued with in the gap of hardly a week. In the mean time, the petitioner has been making sincere efforts for changing the meter and related equipments. The petitioner fervently argued that when ever the meter is found to be defective, the bill has to be issued based on the average reading of the meter. The licensee has utterly failed in calculating the bill without considering the basic norm prevailing in the board. Hence the Hon’ble Forum is sought to issue justice in his favour and to exempt him from the burden of penalty.

Version by the Respondent:-

The written statement filed by the AEE,Electrical Sub Division,Uppala is as follows.-

It is submitted that there is an HT electric connection bearing Lc No.17/3941 in the name of M/s Arch Ply N Boards at Kunjathur under Electrical Section Manjeshwar. While taking routine monthly reading the Assistant Engineer,Electrical Section Manjeshwar found that, the meter is not running and declared faulty from 01/2018. The matter had been informed to the consumer and average bill issued there after. The consumer did not replace the faulty meter with a new one. As per tariff order dated 17.4.2017 part B-HT & EHT tariff,general condition4(d),if any existing consumer having elected to purchase and supply the meter, for replacement of the defective meter in his premises, fails to do so within two months, such consumers will be charged 50% extra over the prevailing rate applicable to him both for demand and energy for the said two months and one month thereafter.

Since the consumer did not replace the faulty meter after the expiry of 2 months,penal bill of 50% of monthly bill of 04/2018 for Rs1,58,935/-(50% of 3,17,870/-) had been charged.

In 05/2018,penal charges for balance 2 months charged since the consumer did not replace the faulty meter, which amounts Rs3,16,869.99/-It is submitted that the bill of 04/2018 and 05/2018 had been issued as per the direction in tariff order dated 17.4.2017 which is prevailing in KSEBL now.

Under this circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the petition may be dismissed directing the petitioner to remit the regular bill.

Discussion, analysis and findi ngs :-

The hearing of the case was convened on 07.2.2019 and both the petitioner and the respondent were present.

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

The petitioner M/s. Arch Ply N Boards is an HT consumer bearing No.17/3941 under Electrical Section, Manjeswar. While taking monthly reading in January 2018, the Assistant Engineer found that the meter installed in the premises is not working and hence declared the meter as faulty. It is reported by the respondent that the matter was informed to the consumer and average bill issued thereafter. Since the meter is not replaced with correct meter the status of the meter remained as ‘faulty’ and billing based on average consumption continued.

As per tariff order dated 17/4/2017 Part B of HT & EHT tariff, General condition 4(d)if any existing consumer having elected to purchase and supply the meter, for replacement of the defective meter in his premises, fails to do so within two months, such consumers will be charged 50% extra over the prevailing rate applicable to him both for demand and energy for the said two months and one month thereafter.

Hence while issuing regular current charge bill (demand notice) for the month of April/2018 a penalty of Rs.1,58,935.19 was included being 50% of the total of demand charge and energy charge.

Similarly the demand notice for May 2018 included a penalty of Rs. 3,16,869.99 which being penal charge @ 50% of the total of demand and energy charges for balance 2 months.

As per the documents produced before the Forum, it is revealed that a proper intimation was given to the consumer vide letter dated 26-3-2018 of the Deputy Chief Engineer,Electrical Circle, Kasaragod to replace the faulty meter. As per Regulation 118(3) of Electricity Supply Code 2014 if a meter is found damaged upon inspection by the licensee or on the complaint of consumer the replacement with a correct meter shall be done within 15 days for HT meters.

Also as per the condition stipulated on the agreement for supply of HT energy (Regulation 103(3) clause 4, if the consumer opts to purchase his meter, the maintenance shall be done by him as per the provisions in the Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2014.Hence the petitioner is bound to obey the time limit specified.

The test report of the newly provided CTPT and TOD meter show that the testing fee is seen remitted on 02.7.2018.

The petitioner was allowed 15 days time from the date of receipt of intimation dated 26.3.2018 by the Deputy Chief Engineer and hence the allowed time was till 15.4.2018 for the procurement of new meter.

The petitioner procured the new meter and produced the same for testing on 02.7.2018.

In view of the above it is proved that more than two months delay occurred from the part of the petitioner to procure new meter even if the documentary evidence of proper intimation given to him is considered.

Hence the issuance of penal bill is in order except the charge in period of penalization. Penalization shall be for the period from 15.4.2018 to 30.6.2018.

As the action taken by the licensee is appropriate, the petition is dismissed.

DECISION:-

1. The petition is dismissed. 2. The petitioner is permitted to remit the penal bill in 12 installments, if he is desirous of doing so, to avail the installment facility.

Dated this the 28 th day of Feb, 2019

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Robin Peter Lekharani R. Beena Gopinath. S

Member III Member II Chairperson. Endt.on CGRF-NR/OP 138/2018-19 / 797/ 28/2/2019

Forwarded to: If the petitioner is not satisfied with the above order of 1) The Manager, this Forum, he is at liberty to prefer appeal before Arch Ply N Board, State Electricity Ombudsman, Charangattu Bhavan L C N 17/3941,Thalappadi, Building No.34/895,Mamangalam,Anchumana Road, Kunjathur P.O, Edapally,Kochi-682024 (Ph: 04842346488) Kasaragod-671323 within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

2) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, KSEB Ltd, Uppala, Kasaragod District-671326.

Copy submitted to: Chief Engineer (Distribution –North Malabar) Kannur.

Copy to: 1. The Secretary, KSEB Ltd., Vydyuthibhavanam, Thiruvananthapuram.

2. Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Kasaragod. 3. The Executive Engineer, Forwarded Electrical Division, Kasaragod. Sd/- 4. The Assistant Engineer, Chairperson Electrical Section, Manjeshwar.