JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These appeals under Section 125 of the Electricity Act,
2003 call in question the correctness of an order dated 23
rd
November, 2006, passed by the Appellate Tribunal for
Electricity whereby a batch of appeals including those filed
by the appellants against an order dated 8
th
June, 2006
passed by the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission,
have been dismissed.
(2.) Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited ('JVVNL' for short),
Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited ('JDVVNL' for short)
and Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited ('AVVNL' for short),
submitted separate applications before the Rajasthan
Electricity Regulatory Commission (for short 'Commission')
at Jaipur in terms of Sections 62 and 64 of the Electricity
Act, 2003 for revision of tariff to be effective from
December 1, 2004. Each one of these distribution
companies ('Discoms' for short) had an existing tariff but in
their respective applications they sought an identical tariff
revision which requests were taken up by the Commission
for consideration together and disposed of in terms of a
common order dated 17
th
December, 2004, passed after
notices regarding filing of the said applications were
published in different newspapers having circulation in the
State of Rajasthan. Several objections were filed and
suggestions made by nearly 100 individuals and
organisations in the course of the proceedings before the
Commission. All these objections were then considered by
the Commission no matter only 38 of those who had filed
the same had complied with the requirement laid down by
the former. A large number of people and organisations
even applied for personal hearing and were heard on
different dates at different venues fixed for the purpose.
Some of these objections also related to individual
problems of the consumers or disputes relating to bills and
other matters which were directed to be considered by the
Discoms and decision taken on the same under intimation
to the persons concerned. Other issues including those
questioning the maintainability of the petitions and alleging
non-compliance with the regulations and directions of the
Commission were also raised. Issues touching reforms in
power sector, non-determination of the Rajasthan Vidyut
Utpadan Nigam's tariff from whom the Discoms purchase
electricity, poor performance of Vidyut Vitran Nigams were
also agitated. Similarly objections to the proposed increase
in tariff, interest charges, depreciation etc. too were raised
and examined by the Commission. Suggestions regarding
improvement, objections relating to high T&D losses,
inadequacy of staff, continuation of un-metered supply,
issue of deemed licensee and tariff for deemed licensee
were also examined. Questions relating to high voltage
supply, segregation of mixed load, billing demand, demand
based tariff for MIP consumers, power factor and shunt
capacitor surcharge, vigilance checking of consumers,
minimum billing, agriculture, domestic and industrial tariff
too were examined by the Commission apart from several
other issues that were placed before the Commission to
which the Commission has made a reference in its order
dated 8
th
June, 2006. The Commission eventually directed
that the revised tariff determined by it will become effective
from 1
st
January, 2005 and remain in force till the same is
amended by the Commission by a separate order passed by
it.
(3.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Commission, the
appellants and a large number of other consumers in that
category filed review petitions under Section 94 (1)(f) of
the Electricity Act, 2003 seeking review and continuation of
the incentive scheme. These review petitions were
dismissed by the Commission in terms of its order dated 8
th
June, 2006. The Commission noted the contention urged on
behalf of the petitioners that they were affected by the
withdrawal of the incentive scheme. It was also urged that
these consumers had made investments on the basis of the
incentive scheme bona fide believing that the same would
continue for at least three years. The review petitioners,
therefore, sought continuation of the said scheme by
suitable review of the Commission's order dated 17
th
December, 2004. The Commission also noted the
opposition of the Discoms to the said prayer and the
contention that the incentive scheme was to be effective
upto 31
st
March, 2003 or till the Commission issued a tariff
order whichever was earlier.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.