IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, HARISANKAR V.MENON
Kerala State Electricity Board Limited, Represented By Its Secretary – Appellant
Versus
Pooja Milk Foods (P) Ltd, Regd., Represented By Director – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.
These intra-court appeals call for a decision on the interpretation of modern legislation in the context of the policy of liberalisation protecting the interests of consumers of public utility services.
2. The appellant is the Kerala State Electricity Board and its officials (hereinafter referred to as the ‘licensee’). The licensee approached this Court in a writ petition, challenging an order of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CGRF’). CGRF is established by the licensee themselves as mandated under the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). The statutory provision under Section 42 (5) of the Act mandates licensees to establish a forum for redressal of grievances of the consumers in accordance with the guidelines as may be specified by the State Commission. The State Commission is a statutory body constituted under Section 82 of the Act and known as the State Electricity Regulatory Commission.
3. The learned Single Judge who heard the matter accepted the objection raised by the respondent-consumer on the question related to maintainability. The learned Single Judge was of the view that CGR


High Court of M.P. v. Mahesh Prakash
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission v. Reliance Energy Ltd.
Airports Economic Regulatory Authority of India v. Delhi International Airport Ltd.
Eminent Sea Foods(P)Ltd v. Kerala State Electricity Board and Others
CGRF decisions bind the licensee as part of its governance framework, asserting consumer rights under the Electricity Act, 2003.
The court ruled that a distribution licensee cannot maintain a writ petition against the decisions of its own Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, which operates as an internal mechanism under the Ele....
The Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain complaints related to theft of energy under the Electricity Act, which are to be addressed by specific statutory forums.
The court established that the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) had jurisdiction to adjudicate individual billing grievances, rejecting the argument that such disputes should be referred to ....
Electricity – Regulation 6.6 of the Regulations, 2006 for admitting grievance of a consumer is directory.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consumers' agreement to bear infrastructural costs and purchase meters and metering cubicles, which negated their claim for refund under the Re....
The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum lacks jurisdiction to direct revisions of energy bills and grant subsidies, which fall under the authority of the Government of Maharashtra.
The court ruled that victims of electrical accidents can approach Consumer Fora under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, despite the existence of a grievance mechanism under the Electricity Act, 2003....
The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum lacks jurisdiction to revise energy bills or grant subsidies, which are matters for the Government of Maharashtra.
Writ petitions challenging regulatory fixation of normative O&M charges as tariff component not maintainable due to statutory appeal to expert Appellate Tribunal under Electricity Act, absent jurisdi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.