The Tamil Nadu Electricity Ombudsman, Chennai has expressed displeasure over a unit of Tangedco’s Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) for neither acknowledging a petition of consumer nor conducting a hearing.
The very purpose of the constitution of the CGRF for protecting the interest of the consumers is defeated by such an act of the forum, it said.
In his petition, P. Muthusamy, a resident of Velachery, said he had applied for shifting 1kw solar roof top plant connected to his ground floor to first floor and as there was no response from the concerned Assistant Engineer, he filed a petition dated September 19, 2020 with CGRF, Chennai EDC/South II.
ADVERTISEMENT
The CGRF has also neither acknowledged his petition nor conducted any hearing, but he received a reply on December 22, stating that his request was not feasible, as per the petition.
Subsequently, he made a request to allow addition of 1kw solar plant each to his service connections on the ground and first floor, but it was denied stating that the existing billing software cannot accommodate such additions.
Last year, Muthusamy, former director (engineering), Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, had written to the regulator flagging the poor functioning of CGRF.
ADVERTISEMENT
In its reply, the Tangedco said that shifting of load and adding load to existing solar service is not feasible considering the present rules and further stated that there is no provision for receiving applications under manual category for addition of load.
S. Devarajan, Electricity Ombudsman, said as per rules the shifting of solar PV load from one service connection to another service connection necessitates termination of agreement and hence he cannot order for shifting.
However, he noted that there is no bar to enhance the solar rooftop load to the level of sanctioned demand as per current norms and the consumer can submit a separate application to enhance the load to his service connection on first floor, while directing Tangedco to permit the addition within 30 days from date of receiving the application.
The Ombudsman also rejected Tangedco’s plea on billing software, citing that it was not supported by a valid document. He also said the plea of adding additional load to both service connections was not considered, as it was not part of the petition filed before CGRF.