Hon'ble Amitava Lala, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by Ghaziabad Induction Furnace Association, which is a registered welfare association of the owners of Rolling and Re-rolling Mills and Arc/Induction Furnace in the district of Ghaziabad and Association of Secondary Steel Manufacturers, Ghaziabad.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioners is with regard to the public notice issued by the U.P. Power Corporation on 11.3.2011, being Annexure-6 to the writ petition. THE public notice issued by the U.P. Power Corporation is as follows : Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited Shakti Bhawan', 14-Ashok Marg, Lucknow. PUBLIC NOTICE Pursuant to provisions contained in Indian Electricity Act, 2003, the State Government owned distribution companies viz. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Madhyanchal VidyutVitran Nigam Ltd., Paschimanchal, VidyutVitran Nigam and Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., have submitted petition to UPERC to create a new Tariff category namely HV-5 for Industrial connections with process- Arc/Induction Furnance, Rolling Mills and Mini Steel Plants which are part of HV- 2 category of present Tariff Order. In compliance to the instructions of UPERC for information to the general public, consumers (including consumers of KESCo) the rates of newly created HV-5 category are being notified as under:-_ JUDGEMENT_529_ADJ5_2011Image1.jpg All concerned, consumers, institutions, licensee and department Government of U.P. may send their representation, if any, in 6 copies (4 copies) to Secretary, UPERC, 2nd Floor, Kisan Mandi Bhawan, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010 and 2 copies to Chief Engineer, RAU, 15th floor, Shakti Bhawan Extn.,14-Ashok Marg, Lucknow-226001) latest by 30.3.2011. Nayneet Sehgal Chairman The petitioners have challenged the public notice. According to them such public notice as issued by Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, Lucknow is required to be quashed since the Corporation is not authorized to issue such notice. Further prayers are with regard to creating new category for Arch/Induction Furnace, Rolling and Re-rolling Mills which is in respect of Rate Schedule HV-2 category regarding which we are not required to discuss this issue in the present writ petition. The petitioner's case is that the U.P. State Electricity Board was formed and continued till 14.1.2000 for the purpose of transmission and distribution of electricity in the State of Uttar Pradesh. It was divided into three organizations out of which one is Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, having licence in respect of transmission and distribution upto 12.8.2003. Now it has been divided into five organizations. U.P. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. is the holder of transmission licence and so far as the distribution is concerned four other companies have been formed which are Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
(3.) ACCORDING to Mr. B.C.Rai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, when the U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. has its wno licence it cannot issue a public notice to make representation to the Regulatory Commission. In other words, Regulatory Commission the issue in such manner as proposed. On the other hand, Mr. P.K Shukla who is appearing for the U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. and also for Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. has contended before us that there is no bar of issuing any notice as per Section 64 (2) of the Electricity Act, 2003. ACCORDING to Section 64 (1)an application for determination of tariff under Section 62 shall be made by a generating company or licensee in such manner and accompanied by such fee, as may be determined by regulations. Sub-Section 2 of Section 64 says every applicant shall publish the application, in such abridged form and manner, as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission. In Section 62 Appropriate Commission is directed to determine tariff. There is no dispute that Appropriate Commission, in this case, is Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission and it is authorized to determined the tariff. Mr. B.C. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners, has drawn our attention to Sub-Section 4 of Section 62 to thrust his case even towards the merits. Section 61 (d) says that Appropriate Commission shall, subject to other provisions, specify the terms and conditions for the determination of tariff, and in doing so, shall be guided by following namely 'safeguarding of consumers' interest and at the same time, recovery of the cost of electricity in a reasonable manner. Section 62 (4) says that no tariff or part of any tariff may ordinarily be amended, more frequently than once in any financial year, except in respect of any changes expressly permitted under the terms of any fuel surcharge formula as may be specified. In this case 2009-2010 determinations are already there. Therefore, no such change is required to be made in this financial year and it will go against the interest of the consumers.;