We can review power tariff orders : High Court
Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has ruled that the tariff orders passed by the Electricity Regulatory Authorities are subject to scrutiny by the Court in appropriate cases.
While quashing the decisions of the power distribution companies of the erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh, to collect energy charges on excess energy from the petitioner companies, Justice A. Ramalingeswara Rao held that though the Commission is a creature of a statute, it cannot claim any immunity for its actions. He said, when the decision making process is vitiated; this court can certainly interfere with the decision and quash the same.
Sri Dhanalakshmi Cotton and Rice Mills private limited of Guntur and other industries moved the court against the decision of the Power Distribution Companies, contending that while fixing the retail tariff rates, the Commission has not followed the procedure prescribed under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Business Regulations framed there under.
The petitioners argued that there was no rationale in clubbing contracted maximum demand and energy, which are independent and though this point was earlier decided by this court.The distribution companies submitted that the Commission has considered various aspects of the matter and no opportunity need be given to consumers, while deciding the rates.
While allowing the petitions, the judge said when the Commission itself says that energy charges and demand charges are two separate components; there was no explanation for mixing both the components in the case of exceeding the contracted demand.
The judge directed that if the respondents had collected any energy charges on excess energy, they can either refund or adjust it in future bills of the petitioners.
While quashing the decisions of the power distribution companies of the erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh, to collect energy charges on excess energy from the petitioner companies, Justice A. Ramalingeswara Rao held that though the Commission is a creature of a statute, it cannot claim any immunity for its actions. He said, when the decision making process is vitiated; this court can certainly interfere with the decision and quash the same.
Sri Dhanalakshmi Cotton and Rice Mills private limited of Guntur and other industries moved the court against the decision of the Power Distribution Companies, contending that while fixing the retail tariff rates, the Commission has not followed the procedure prescribed under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Business Regulations framed there under.
The petitioners argued that there was no rationale in clubbing contracted maximum demand and energy, which are independent and though this point was earlier decided by this court.The distribution companies submitted that the Commission has considered various aspects of the matter and no opportunity need be given to consumers, while deciding the rates.
While allowing the petitions, the judge said when the Commission itself says that energy charges and demand charges are two separate components; there was no explanation for mixing both the components in the case of exceeding the contracted demand.
The judge directed that if the respondents had collected any energy charges on excess energy, they can either refund or adjust it in future bills of the petitioners.
