ORDER
P.D. Dinakaran, J.
1. Challenging the appointment of the second respondent as member of the State Advisory Committee of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Regulatory Advising Commission, as notified in the notification dated 16.10.2002, for a period of one year from the date of notification, viz. 16.10.2002, representing the labour sector, the petitioner, who is admittedly one of the National Secretaries of the Electricity Employees Federation of India, seeks a writ of Declaration that the appointment of the second respondent to the State Advisory Committee by the first respondent's notification No. TNERC/SACR/2/2, dated 16th October 2002, published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette without prior consultation with the representative labour groups and without considering the claims of eligible persons like him for appointment as member of the State Advisory Committee is void and of no legal effect.
2.1. According to Mr. K. Chandru, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the appointment of the second respondent is contrary to Section 37 of the Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for want of transparency in the impugned appointment and is also in violation to Regulation 5 and 6 of the State Advisory Committee Regulations 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regulation').
2.2. Concededly, the appointment of the second respondent itself has come to an end on 15.10.2003. Therefore, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer to the effect that atleast in the future appointment of the members of the State Advisory Committee, the respondent shall strictly adhere to the provisions of the Act and Regulations.
3.1. Mr. K.S. Natarajan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Commission submits that there cannot be any dispute that the first respondent Commission is under a statutory obligation to ensure transparency in discharging their functions and to follow the provisions of the said regulation strictly. However, he gives an undertaking that the first respondent shall do so in future, as there is no necessity to traverse the allegations made against the second respondent at this point of time, in view of the restricted relief sought for on behalf of the petitioner by the learned senior counsel.
4.1. Even though the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the appointment of the second respondent as a member of the State Advisory Committee is not sustainable in law, it is not necessary to go into such controversy at this point of time, as the learned senior counsel restricts his prayer only to safeguard the future appointments.
4.2. In this regard, I am obliged to refer to Sections 17(6), 24, 37 and 58 of the Act which reads as follows:
' Section 17:
(1) ...
(2) ...
(3) ...
(4) ...
(5) ...
(6) The Chairperson and the Members of the State Commission shall be appointed by the State Government on the recommendation of a Selection Committee referred to in section 18..
Section 24:
(1) The State Commission may, by notification, establish with effect from such date as it may specify in such notification, a Committee to be known as the State Advisory Committee.
(2) The State Advisory Committee shall consist of not more than twenty one members to represent the interests of commerce, industry, transport, agriculture, labour, consumers, non-governmental organisations and academic and research bodies in the energy sector.
(3) The Chairperson and the Members of the State Commission shall be ex officio Chairperson and ex officio Members of the State Advisory Committee.
Section 37:
The Commissioner shall ensure transparency while exercising their powers and discharging their functions.
Section 58:
(1) The State Commission may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations consistent with this Act and the rules made thereunder to carry out the purposes of this Act... '
4.3. By exercising the powers conferred under the State Commission to make regulations under Section 58(1) of the Act, the State Commission notified the State Advisory Committee Regulations 2002.
4.4. As per Regulations 5, the Committee is to consist of not more than 21 members (not including ex-officio members) with a view to reflect a balance of various interest groups in State Energy Sector as outlined in Section 24(2) of the Act. Preference is to be given to the representatives with a significant understanding of the power sector and contribution from the following sectors, viz. commerce, Industry, Transportation, Agriculture, Labour, Consumer, Non-Governmental organisation, Academic & Research bodies, Licensees and Generating Companies, and State Transmission Utility/Board.
4.5. As per Regulation 6, the Commission shall appoint the candidates to serve on the Committee after consultation with the individuals/representative organisations/bodies of such interest groups. The Commission may choose to limit the number of members in each sector, depending upon the important relationship the concerned sector bears with the electricity industry.
4.6. A harmonious reading of the above provisions of the Act and the regulations makes it clear that the State Advisory Committee is a statutory body constituted under Section 24 of the Act and the same shall represent different sectors, one of them being 'labour' and the constitution of the State Advisory Committee is also one of the powers conferred under the Commission in discharging their function and therefore, the Commissioner has to ensure transparency in constituting the Committee and as per Regulation 5, representatives appointed so shall have the significant understanding of the power sector and they should be contributed from the following sectors, viz. commerce, Industry, Transportation, Agriculture, Labour, Consumer, Non-Governmental organisation, Academic & Research bodies, Licensees and Generating Companies, and State Transmission Utility/Board.
4.7. Again, as per Regulation 6, before appointing the members of the State Advisory Committee, consultation with the individual representatives, organisations/bodies of such interested groups, representing the above mentioned sectors are also required.
4.8. A reading of Regulations 5 and 6, into Section 37 of the Act, makes it clear that the procedure of constituting Advisory Committee, selection of the members, and the report of the same shall be transparent, otherwise, the same is questionable.
4.9. Therefore, except to direct the respondents to ensure transparency in the appointment of the representatives of the State Advisory Committee constituted by the State Commission scrupulously, in future, no further order is required in this writ petition.
5. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. WPMP No. 65388 of 2002 is closed.