The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) has “strongly condemned” Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM) for “changing its stand from time to time” and has overruled the downward revision of tariffs of two solar power plants, 50 MW each, of Walwhan Renewable Energy (formerly, Welspun Renewable Energy). 

From the judgment it is clear that BESCOM has been caught trying to pull a fast one over Welspun, hoping to downward revise the tariffs from ₹7.09 a kWhr for one plant and ₹7.01 for another, to ₹6.51. The state regulatory, Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission, acquiesced in this matter and has been duly taken to task by APTEL. 

BESCOM first agreed to condone a delay on the part of Welspun in commissioning the plants, recognising that such delay was because of factors beyond the control of Welspun. But even as the Commission was in the process of approving the delay, BESCOM changed its mind and decided (in a subsequent meeting of the board of directors) that it was not condoning the delay but leaving the matter to the discretion of the Commission. 

In its judgment, APTEL has noted, “There is a change in the stand whereby the in-principle approval accorded by the Board during the 82nd meeting was changed to submission of the proposal to the State Commission with recommendation to the proposal. However, during the hearing before us, the stand further changed through oral submission that the proposal of the Appellant was only forwarded to the State Commission for its approval without any comments.  

We strongly condemn such an act; they cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time.” 

The judgment observed that the principles of estoppel clearly bar such an action on the part of BESCOM. Further, it said that the Commission being a neutral entity “was expected to analyse the facts placed on record, but we note that it has totally ignored the change of stand from time to time by BESCOM.” 

Also, since the delay is calculated from the ‘effective date’ of the power purchase agreement, the question of what the effective date is also came under examination. BESCOM argued unsuccessfully that the ‘effective date’ was the date on which both the parties signed the agreement. APTEL said that the effective date was the date on which the Commission gave its approval to the PPA, as held in several previous cases. 

comment COMMENT NOW