- (1.) THE application was made for review of order dated 19.7.2006 in Petition No. 159/2004 whereby the Commission had determined tariff for Korba STPS for the period 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009. A number of grounds were raised by the petitioner in support of the application for review. By order dated 1.12.2006, the application for review was admitted on grounds of computation of interest on loan and computation of cost of maintenance spares. INTEREST ON LOAN
(2.) It has been pointed out that tariff for the period 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009 was claimed by the petitioner considering an amount of Rs. 37671 lakh as loan outstanding as on 31.3.2004, after adjusting the cumulative repayment of Rs. 46957 lakh up to that date. The petitioner has averred that the Commission in its order dated 19.7.2006 has taken cumulative repayment of loan up to 31.3.2004 as Rs. 67646 lakh and thereby the loan outstanding as on 31.3.2004 has been considered Rs. 16964 lakh, and allowed interest accordingly. According to the petitioner, the methodology adopted by the Commission will leave unserviced in tariff the actual loan amount of Rs. 20689 lakh. The petitioner has contended that determination of cumulative repayment up to 31.3.2004 ought to have been based on actual repayment or normative repayment of loan and not on the basis loan repayment, actual or normative, whichever is higher. The Commission while computing interest on loan component of tariff in respect of Korba STPS for the period prior to 1.4.2004 as also for the period 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2009 considered the normative repayment of loan. In certain other cases, however, the Commission had considered the cumulative repayment of loan on the basis of actual repayment since it was higher than the normative repayment. In those cases, the petitioner had filed appeals before the Appellate Tribunal impugning the methodology adopted by the Commission for computation of cumulative repayment. The Appellate Tribunal in its various orders has decided that the cumulative repayment is to be worked out by considering normative repayment, irrespective of whether it is higher or lower than the actual repayment. In view of this decision of the Appellate Tribunal, interest on loan already allowed based on normative repayment is not to be reopened since the methodology adopted in case of Korba STPS is in conformity with the decision of the Appellate Tribunal.
(3.) MADHYA Pradesh Power Trading Company Ltd (MPPTCL) the first respondent, in its reply has stated that the Appellate Tribunal vide its judgment dated 14.10.2006 in Appeals No. 135/2005 to 140/2005 had decided that FERV component of loan should be added to loan and no portion of FERV is allocable to equity. MPPTCL has requested that the effect of the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal may also be considered in case of Korba STPS while making the decision in the present review petition.;