Decided on February 13,2015

Vidarbha Industries Association Respondents


- (1.) Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. (MSEDCL) has filed a Petition dated 30 December, 2013 seeking directions under Sections 2(8), 9, 42(2) and 86 of the Electricity Act (EA), 2003 for review of the Commission's Order dated 8 September, 2004 in Case Nos. 55 and 56 of 2003 ('the CPP Order') regarding power purchase and other dispensation for fossil fuel based Captive Power Plants (CPPs). Vidarbha Industries Association (VIA), Nagpur and M/s Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (BIL) were subsequently impleaded as Respondents, being the original Petitioners in those Cases.
(2.) MSEDCL's original prayers are as follows: i) "To admit the Petition for review of CPP order dated 08.09.2004 in Case No. 55 and 56 of 2003; ii) To condone the delay in filing the review petition; iii) To consider the submissions and discontinue or align or modify the CPP order dated 08.09.2004; iv) To permit MSEDCL to enforce the OA regulation in non discriminatory manner on all consumers irrespective of their being captive or otherwise;..."
(3.) In its Petition, MSEDCL submitted as follows: - (a) The impugned Order was issued more than nine years back in circumstances different from those which have emerged since. The Order was issued in specific circumstances of acute power shortage, both peak and off peak, throughout the year. (i) Average Peak load shortage in FY 2004 -05: 2417 MW (ii) Seasonal and off -season shortages were 2476 MW and 1431 MW respectively in FY 2004 -2005. (iii) The Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses were very high (35.28% during 2004 -05) and contributed significantly to the power shortage. (iv) Industries faced staggering load shedding as well as daily peak hour load shedding of 2476 MW. (b) The T&D losses have come down to 14.52% and the power situation in Maharashtra has improved significantly. MSEDCL is supplying continuous power to all Industrial consumers. For the other categories also, load shedding is undertaken in accordance with the protocol, and only on feeders which have a mix of low collection and high losses. (c) MSEDCL's blue print for FY 2019 -20 also assures continuous power supply, and it has tied up 5500 MW on long -term basis. 1250 MW of power is being sourced through Open Access (OA) from outside the State by 400 consumers . (d) The procedure/mechanisms for reducing the demand supply gap were for a temporary period. Review of these procedures is essential now that the demand supply gap is bridged and the purpose of the CPP Order has been met. (e) Along with the change in circumstances, several later dispensations have rendered the CPP Order redundant or liable for review: (i). MERC (Distribution Open Access) (DOA) Regulations, 2005: Some of the provisions of the CPP Order dated 8 September, 2004 regarding contract demand, banking, wheeling of power, energy accounting (ToD) are not in accordance with the regulatory framework provided for OA by the Commission. (ii). Final Balancing and Settlement Mechanism (FBSM): Vide Order dated 17 May, 2007 in Case No. 42 of 2006, FBSM has been implemented in the State, wherein energy accounting at 15 min. time block has been made mandatory for Distribution Licensees and OA consumers. (iii). Cross Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) determination Order: The CPP Order provides for stand -by demand/supply at prevalent consumer category tariff, whereas the Commission's CSS determination Order dated 9 September, 2011 stipulates that stand -by supply shall be provided at temporary tariff. (f) Considering the changed circumstances, changes in power scenario, implementation of FBSM and framework of OA, certain provisions in CPP Order dated 8 September, 2004 which are not consistent with the existing legal framework need to be reviewed. ;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.