JUDGMENT

The petitioner, the Kerala State Electricity Board, has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Ext.P7 order issued by the 1^st respondent Ombudsman.

2. I have heard Sri. Riji Rajendran, learned counsel for the Kerala State Electricity Board.

3. The 3^rd respondent herein is a consumer, on whose complaint, the 2^nd respondent Forum issued the order at Ext.P4, finding fault with the petitioner Board. By the order at Ext.P4, the Board was directed to compensate the consumer with payment of Rs.25/- for each day of default. It may straight away be noticed that the order at Ext.P4 was not challenged by the petitioner. However, the consumer sought to challenge Ext.P4 order of the Forum by filing a further appeal before the Ombudsman. By the impugned order at Ext.P7, the Ombudsman upheld the directions contained in Ext.P4 order of CGRF. It is in the afore circumstances, the petitioner Board has approached this Court seeking to challenge Ext.P7 order of the

1^st respondent Ombudsman.

4. In my opinion, though the learned counsel for the petitioner raised various contentions with reference to the sustainability or otherwise of Ext.P7 order, with specific reference to the ret