- (1.) M /s. Wardha Power Company Limited, Hyderabad is the Appellant herein.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission's the impugned order dated 1.6.2011, directing the Appellant to make the payment of transmission charges for the period of 101 days amounting to Rs.9,04,06,120.10(Nine crores and odd) to the Maharashtra State Transmission Company Ltd(R1). with interest, the Appellant has presented this Appeal.
(3.) THE facts of the case are as follows: a) The Appellant Company is a generating Company. The first Respondent, Maharashtra State Transmission Company Limited is a Transmission licensee in the State of Maharashtra. The Appellant Page 2 of 31 Judgment in Appeal No 85 of 2011 Company has set -up a captive power plant at Warora of 540 MW in two stages of 270 MW each. b) In the first stage, the Appellant was required to supply 270 MW to its own captive consumer M/s. Viraj Profiles Limited. In the second stage, the Appellant was required to supply the remaining power to other consumers under open access. c) Therefore, on 14.5.2007, the Appellant applied for a Long Term Open Access for the use of transmission network of Transmission Company (R -1) between 220 kV Warrora Substation to 220 kV Boisar Substation for evacuation of its power from stage I to supply power to its captive consumer M/s.Viraj Profiles. d) In pursuance of its request, the Long Term Open Access transmission capacity rights for transmission system between 220 kV Warora Substation and 220 kV Boisar Substation for transmission of power from Appellant's generating station to M/s Viraj Profile at Boisar were sanctioned by the Transmission Company (R -1) to the Appellant on 21.5.2008. In pursuance of the same on 12.6.2008, the Bulk Power Transmission Agreement (Transmission Agreement) between the Appellant and the Transmission Company(R1) for granting Long Term Open Access Page 3 of 31 Judgment in Appeal No 85 of 2011 transmission capacity rights for transmission of power from the 220 kV Warora Substation to 220 kV Boisar Substation over 1st Respondent's transmission network was entered into. e) M/s Viraj Profile was the consumer for the power from Stage -I of the Appellant's generating station. Some arrangement was required to be carried out to draw this power from 220 kV Boisar Substation to premises of M/s Viraj Profile. Accordingly, the Transmission Company(R -1) by its letter dated 3.10.2009 reminding the Appellant that they had not submitted the status regarding the drawal arrangement for supply of power to M/S. Viraj Profiles from existing 220 KV Boisar substation of the Transmission Company and asking them to send required status report. There was no reply to this letter. f) On 9.11.2009, in accordance with Clause 10 of Transmission Agreement, a Connection Agreement was also executed between the Transmission Company(R1) and the Appellant for inter connection of their stage -I generation at 220 KV Warora sub station of the Transmission Company. g) Consequent upon execution of the Connection Agreement the Appellant informed to Transmission Page 4 of 31 Judgment in Appeal No 85 of 2011 Company(R1) on 5.12.2009 that erection of 220 KV D/C line from their generating plant to the existing 220 KV Warora sub station had been completed and requested for charging the same. h) On 19.12.2009, the 220 KV D/C line from generating plant of the Appellant to 220 KV Warora sub station was finally charged for facilitating drawal 20 MVA start -up power by the Appellant. i) As stated above, although the letter dated 3.10.2009 from the Transmission Company (R -1) reminding the Appellant about non -submission of the status report regarding the drawal arrangement at 220 kV Boisar Substation and asking them to submit the same remained unanswered. j) Having been silent for a long time despite receipt of the letter dated 3.10.2009, the Appellant through its letter dated 23.2.2010 informed the Transmission Company (R -1) that the Appellant wishes to cancel the Transmission Agreement citing inability of M/s. Viraj Profiles for availing stage -I power of the Appellant's generating station at Warora. It also informed through the said letter that the Appellant wanted to sell the power to the Maharashtra Distribution Company on short term basis. Admittedly, Page 5 of 31 Judgment in Appeal No 85 of 2011 till 23.2.2010, the Appellant had not informed the Transmission Company regarding the status of drawal arrangement at 220 kV Boisar substation for M/s. Viraj Profiles. k) On receipt of this letter dated 23.2.2010, the Transmission Company by the letter dated 18.3.2010 intimated to the Appellant that they would be required to pay the requisite transmission charges w.e.f. 19.12.2009 i.e. from the date of readiness of evacuation arrangements before the cancellation of the transmission agreement. In reply to the said letter dated 18.3.2010, the Appellant sent a reply through its letter dated 22.3.2010 stating that Transmission Charges were not payable since the term of the transmission agreement cannot result in any financial liability as the said agreement had not become effective. l) The Transmission Company having not agreed with the stand of the Appellant, proceeded to issue the letter dated 30.3.2010 demanding the Transmission Charges of Rs.9,04,06,120.10 Paise. Aggrieved by this letter, the Appellant filed a petition before the State Commission on 9.6.2010 seeking for setting aside the said letter dated 30.3.2010. Page 6 of 31 Judgment in Appeal No 85 of 2011 m) The State Commission after hearing the parties, dismissed the said Petition through the impugned order dated 1.6.2011 holding that the Appellant is liable to pay the transmission charges to the Respondent for 101 days from the period between 19.12.2009 and 30.3.2010 to the tune of Rs.9,04,06,120.10 along with the interest. Challenging the said impugned Order dated 1.6.2011 the Appellant has filed this Appeal.;