Comments
In this day and age, a tariff of ₹6.45 a kWhr is shockingly high, but if that is what it is as per rules, then that is what it should be. The Cogeneration Association of India has successfully argued its case at the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) against the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission and others, securing a tariff of ₹6.45, overruling the Commission’s tariff of ₹4.99.
The case is simple. The non-fossil fuel co-generation plants believe that they should get a tariff of ₹6.45 a kWhr, going by the parameters set out in the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Renewable Energy Tariff) Regulations, 2015, (RE Tariff Regulations, 2015). The Commission, on the other hand, fixed a tariff of ₹4.99, because that was the tariff that was discovered through a competitive bidding process (under Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003). The co-generation units were not bidders in the bidding process, yet the Commission applied the same tariff to them.
APTEL observed that the RE Regulations, 2015, “have no connection whatsoever with the tariff based competitive process” under Section 63; the price discovered through the bidding process “is not mentioned even remotely as one of the parameters or benchmarks for determination of tariff on an application under Section 64.”
The Tribunal observed that, “it is well settled that if the law requires something to be done in a particular manner, then such thing has to be done in that manner only.”
It opined that “the State Commission has fallen into serious error by going outside its own Tariff Regulations governing the field.” Pointing out that the tariff works out to ₹6.45 by the parameters set out in RE Tariff Regulations, 2015, the Tribunal said that the tariff discovered through competitive bidding under Section 63 “cannot be one of the benchmarks or touchstones”. The use of such benchmark by the Commission demonstrates that its decision is articulated by extraneous consideration falling outside tariff regulation which had been framed by it and which it was duty bound to follow.”
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.