P.S.DATTA, J. - (1.)NORTHERN Railways, the appellant herein challenges the tariff order dated 13th. September,2010 passed by the Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission, the respondent no1,in respect of Uttar Haryana BijliVitran Nigam Limited and Dakshin Haryana BijliVitran Nigam Limited, the respondent no.2&3 respectively whereby it is alleged that there has been unrealistic hike in railway traction tariff and bulk supply category with no grant of HT rebate to this important segment of the Government utility.
(2.)THE Government of India in the Ministry of Energy had as far back as 01.05.1991 issued a circular to all the State Governments and the State Electricity Boards on the necessity of providing electricity for railway traction at reasonable price so that electric traction does not prove to be costlier than diesel traction. The recommendation of the Public Accounts Committee was that "railways are provided electricity at a reasonable price so that the service cost of electric traction do not artificially become costlier than diesel traction and with a view to reap benefit of the electrification and reduce consumption of precious diesel oil.
(3.)THE National Tariff Policy dated January6, 2006 mandates that the tariff must be linked to cost of service . The State Commissions were directed that they would notify roadmap within six months with a target that latest by the end of the year 2010 -2011 tariff remains within +/or -20% of the average cost of supply. In spite of that the Commission has not worked out the consumer category wise cost of supply and cross subsidy loaded in case of railway traction tariff continues to be unreasonably high.
In this connection , the appellant refers to a decision of this Tribunal dated 2nd. March,2006 passed in Appeal No.79 of 2005 (Union of India Vs. APERC and Others). We will have occasion to reproduce the extract of the decision as will be relevant for the purpose.

;