BEFORE THE GUJARAT ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION In the matter of: AT GANDHINAGAR PETITION NO. 1643 OF 2017 Petition for deciding the maintainability and admissibility under GERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 read with Section 62, 64 of EA, 2003 read with GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011, 2016, NTP and all enabling provisions thereof for the Petition No. 1626 of 2016 filed by TPL-Generation facilities called Ahmedabad Power Plant under Sections 62 and 64 of the EA, 2003 read with GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011 and MYT Regulations 2016 for (i) Truing up of FY 2015-16, (ii) Determination of ARR for MYT Third control period (FY 2016-17 to 2020-21) and (iii) Determination of tariff for FY 2017-18 for its Generation facilities at Ahmedabad. Petitioner : Utility Users' Welfare Association Co-Petitioner - 1 : Gandhinagar Shaher Vasahat Mahamandal Co-Petitioner - 2 : Laghu Udyog Bharti - Gujarat Represented by : Shri S. C. Bohra Co-Petitioner - 3 : Jan Kalyan Foundation Represented by : Shri A. B. Chavda V/s Respondent No. 1 : Torrent Power Limited Generation Respondent No. 2 : Torrent Power Ltd. Distribution (Ahmedabad) Respondent No. 3 : Torrent Power Ltd Distribution (Surat) 1
Respondent No. 4 : Torrent Energy Limited-Distribution-SEZ-(Dahej) Respondent No. 5 : Chief Secretary to Govt. of Gujarat Respondent No. 6 : Secretary, Energy and Petrochemicals Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 7 : Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 8 : Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 9 : Collector of Electricity Duty cum Chief Electrical Inspector, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 10 : The Comptroller & Auditor General of India, Government of India Respondent No. 11 : Secretary, Ministry of Power, Government of India Respondent No. 12 : Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of India Respondent No. 13 : Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Government of India 2
PETITION NO. 1644 OF 2017 In the matter of: Petition for deciding the maintainability and admissibility of the Petitions submitted by TPL in absence of details and documents under GERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004, Fees, fines and charges Regulations 2005 read with Section 61, 62, 64, 86 (a) (b), 86 (2), 94, 142, 146, 149 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011, 2016, NTP and all enabling provisions thereof for the Petition No. 1626 of 2016 filed by TPL-Generation facilities called Ahmedabad Power Plant, No. 1627/1628/1629 filed by TPL-D Ahmedabad, Surat and Dahej licensed area under Section 62 and 64 of the of the EA, 2003 read with GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011 and MYT Regulations 2016 for (i) Truing up of FY 2015-16, (ii) Determination of ARR for MYT Third control period (FY 2016-17 to 2020-21) and (iii) Determination of tariff for FY 2017-18 for its Generation facilities at Ahmedabad and for TPL s Distribution business of Ahmedabad/Gandhinagar, Surat and Dahej licensed area respectively. Petitioner : Utility Users' Welfare Association Co-Petitioner - 1 : Gandhinagar Shaher Vasahat Mahamandal Co-Petitioner - 2 : Laghu Udyog Bharti - Gujarat Represented by : Shri S. C. Bohra Co-Petitioner - 3 : Jan Kalyan Foundation Represented by : Shri A. B. Chavda V/s Respondent No. 1 : Torrent Power Limited Generation Respondent No. 2 : Torrent Power Ltd. Distribution (Ahmedabad) 3
Respondent No. 3 : Torrent Power Ltd Distribution (Surat) Respondent No. 4 : Torrent Energy Limited-Distribution-SEZ-(Dahej) Respondent No. 5 : Chief Secretary to Govt. of Gujarat Respondent No. 6 : Secretary, Energy and Petrochemicals Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 7 : Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 8 : Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 9 : Collector of Electricity Duty cum Chief Electrical Inspector, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 10 : The Comptroller & Auditor General of India, Government of India Respondent No. 11 : Secretary, Ministry of Power, Government of India Respondent No. 12 : Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of India Respondent No. 13 : Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Government of India 4
Respondent No. 14 : Secretary to Prime Minister of India (PMO), New Delhi Respondent No. 15 : Chief Vigilance Commissioner, Government of Gujarat Respondent No. 16 : Central Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offence Wing), Gandhinagar and New Delhi CORAM: Shri Anand Kumar, Chairman Shri K. M. Shringarpure, Member Shri P. J. Thakkar, Member Date: 03/04/2017 DAILY ORDER 1. The Utility Users Welfare Association (UUWA) and other Co-Petitioners namely Gandhinagar Saher Vasahat Mahamandal, Laghu Udyog Bharti and Jan Kalyan Foundation have filed the present petition seeking various prayers on different grounds. The matter was kept for hearing on 24.03.2017. 2. Shri Amarsinh Chavda, on behalf of Jan Kalyan Foundation, submitted that the Commission may consider the objections raised by him while passing order in the Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017 of Torrent Power Limited. 3. Shri S.H. Bohra, on behalf of LUB- Gujarat, submitted that the respondent Torrent Power Limited has not filed any reply to the petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also proposed to join other persons as party respondents as they are necessary and proper party. Further, some of the respondents have filed their reply to the petition and some of persons have requested to enjoin as party respondent. The petitioners have no objections for impleadment to the party respondent. Notices may 5
be issued to new parties who have joined as party respondent by the petitioners and also impleaders. 4. Learned Advocate Ms. Deepa Chauhan, on behalf of the respondent TPL, submitted that the Commission may take the judicial note regarding the actions of the petitioners that they are always raising very serious allegations which proves that their intentions are not bonafide and they deliberately desire to prolong every proceeding in which TPL is one of the party. 5. She referred the petition and submitted that the affidavit has been prepared on 09.01.2017, however, the said petitions were filed by the petitioners on 01.02.2017. Therefore, the petitioner deliberately delayed in filing the petition and wanted that the proceedings of the aforesaid tariff petitions will be delayed on ground of various prayers sought by the petitioner in the present petition. Further, the petition has been registered and numbered on 23.02.2017 and the Commission directed the petitioner to provide a copy of the petition within 7 days. However, the petitioner delivered the same on 20.03.2017. Moreover, the contentions/grounds raised in the petitions have also been a part of the objections in Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017 and TPL had already replied the same. She also submitted that the Commission should dispose of the present petition after considering the contentions of the present petitions as objections in Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017. 6. In reply to the submissions made by Learned Advocate Ms. Deepa Chauhan, Shri S.H. Bohra, submitted that the present petition filed by the petitioners is different and distinct from Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017. Moreover, documents pertaining to PSDF, carrying cost, sales of energy, quantum and revenue earned on it, details of capital expenditure etc. have not been provided with the tariff petitions as referred above by the petitioners. Therefore, TPL has violated the provisions of GERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004, and GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011 and 2016, and provisions of Electricity Act, 2003. No opportunity of hearing given to the present petitioners on the above documents. He requested that there are various issues which needs to be decided in the present petition by the Commission. 6
7. Nobody was present on behalf of UUWA and Gandhinagar Shaher Vasahat Mahamandal. However, the Commission received an email dated 23.03.2017 from UUWA stating that they want to implead a number of parties and also not having objections for impleadment of the parties who have made the applications in this regards. They have requested for filing a rejoinder in reply against the reply received by them and also requested for adjournment of the matter. 8. The Commission also received submissions from Advocate Shri I.J. Desai, on behalf of Mrs. Bhavna Bhaskar, Surat Citizens Council Trust, Surat, the Southern Gujarat Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Surat and Surat Municipal Corporation, Surat, through email dated 22.03.2017. He stated that during the hearing of tariff Petition Nos. 1627/2016 and 1628/2016, he had raised preliminary issue on the subject matter of Petition No. 1643/2017 and he had also sent the written submissions on it on 31.01.2017. He also stated that during the hearing, he gathered an impression from the Commission that MYT petition is on a different footing from all other petitions. However, in order to remove the false impression, he had pointed out from GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011 that they are made subject to GERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004. He requested the Commission to take into consideration while passing the order on Petition No. 1643/2017. 9. We have considered the submissions made by the parties. During the hearing, it was clarified that the Commission has received the present petition on 01.02.2017 i.e. after filing of MYT Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017 by TPL. We also note that the aforesaid petitions are tariff petitions filed by TPL under Sections 61, 62, 64 read with Sections 86 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Commission also notes the provisions of Section 64 of the Act and GERC (MYT) Regulations, 2011 and 2016 under which tariff orders are to be passed timely. 10. We also note that the hearings in the matter of MYT Petition Nos. 1626/2017, 1627/2017, 1628/2017 and 1629/2017 filed by TPL was concluded on 14-02-2017. Almost all the issues raised in present petition were already represented by various stakeholders in the matter of aforesaid MYT Petitions of TPL. 7
11. As UUWA vide their emails dated 23-03-2017 requested the Commission to add the other parties as party respondents to the present petition, the Commission allows the joining of party respondent as prayed by the petitioners. Further, the Commission has received applications for impleadment of parties and the petitioners have no objection to the same. Hence, we decide to allow the impleadment applications filed by Gujarat Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Shree Gujarat Vijli Contractor Mandal and Shree Chhatrapati Shivaji Charitable Trust. As the petitioner proposed to add some new party respondents and as decided earlier, the impleaders also want to join as party respondent, the petitioner is directed to amend the cause title of petition by filing the amendment petition along with affidavit to that extent. 12. We also decide and direct all respondents to file their reply, if any, within four weeks from the receipt of this order, with a copy to other party. The petitioners, are at liberty to file rejoinder in reply, if, any within 3 weeks from the receipt of reply from the respondents. 13. We order accordingly. 14. The next date of hearing will be intimated separately. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- [P. J. THAKKAR] [K. M. SHRINGARPURE] [ANAND KUMAR] Member Member Chairman Place: Gandhinagar Date: 03/04/2017 8