Appeal No.48 Of 2016 and Appeal No.316 Of 2016 & Ia No.656 Of 2016. Case: 1. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited 2. Singhbhum Chamber Of Commerce & Industries Vs 1. Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission and Ors. 2. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited. APTEL (Appellate Tribunal for Electricity)
| Case Number | Appeal No.48 Of 2016 and Appeal No.316 Of 2016 & Ia No.656 Of 2016 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar Mr. Navin Kumar Mr. Aabhas Parimal Mr. Jamnesh Kumar Ms. Aparajita Bhardwaj, Advs. and Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhananjay K. Pathak, advs. and For Respondents: Mr. Farrukh Rasheed and Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhananjay K. Pathak, Advs. and Mr. Farrukh Rasheed and ... |
| Judges | Mrs. Ranjana P. Desai, Chairperson and Mr. I. J. Kapoor, Technical Member. |
| Issue | Electricity Act, 2003 |
| Judgement Date | May 31, 2017 |
| Court | APTEL (Appellate Tribunal for Electricity) |
Order:
-
Both these appeals can be disposed of by a common order because they challenge Provisional Tariff Order dated 14/12/2015 on Review of ARR for F.Y. 2013-14 (6th January 2014 and 31st March, 2014) and F.Y. 2014-15 and ARR and Distribution Tariff for F.Y. 2015-16 for Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited. The impugned order is passed by the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission ("the State Commission").
-
Appeal No.48 of 2016 is filed by the Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and Appeal No.316 of 2016 is filed by Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce and Industries.
-
The Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited has sought to highlight that the State Commission did not properly consider its stand so far as the heads, namely ''Non Tariff Income'', ''Resource Gap Funding Carrying Cost'', ''Revenue Gap'', ''Tariff for CPP Consumers'' and also its stand as regards terms and conditions for supply of various categories of consumers. These grievances are set out in detail in paragraphs Nos.7 (XVI) to 7 (XXVIII) of the appeal memo of Appeal No.48 of 2016. M/s Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce & Industries has in its Appeal No.316 of 2016 raised contentions that while determining the impugned Tariff Order, the Commission has ignored the specific provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, the National Tariff Policy, Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms & Conditions for Determinations of Tariff) Regulations, 2010, its own earlier Tariff Order and even the orders passed by this Tribunal on earlier occasions.
-
The Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce & Industries has complained that the State Commission ought to have considered and applied the provisions strictly and ought not to have appointed Expert Committee in the process of Tariff determination instead of relying upon the outcome of public hearing which took place in the tariff determination process. M/s. Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce & Industries has also...
To continue reading
Request your trial