Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: competition amendment act 2007 section 48 amendment of section 63 Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel Page 6 of about 117 results (0.113 seconds)

Lanco Infratech Ltd. Vs. Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commissio ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... the validity of price to be adopted. this submission is without merit for two reasons. firstly, once it is a single bid, the fundamental aspect of competitive bidding is missing. therefore, before granting consent the state commission shall have to take into consideration the relevant aspects including the price. secondly, the state commission ..... specific. the term consent is used in contrast to the term adopt used in section 63 of the act. in other words, it is no longer a mere adoption of the tariff determined through a competitive bidding process but a specific proactive consideration and consent by the state commission. therefore, the role of the state ..... counsel for the r2 to r4 has cited the following decisions: (i) 2006 (10) scc 1 reliance airport development (p) ltd. vs. airports authority of india (ii) 2007 (2) scc 588 ramchandra murarilal bhattad vs. state of maharashtra (iii) 1979 (3) scc 489 ramana dayaram shetty vs. international airport authority of india (iv) 2001 (2) .....

Kerala High Tension and Extra High Tension Industrial Electricity Cons ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... supply of electricity and also reduces cross subsidies in the manner specified by the appropriate commission by an amendment under electricity (amendment) act, 2007 w.e.f. 15.6.2007. thus the intention of the parliament in amending the above provisions of the act by removing provision for elimination of cross subsidies appears to be that the cross subsidies may be ..... followed, then the tariffs have to be based on the cost to supply a consumer category. however, it is not the intent of the act after the amendment in the year 2007 (act 26 of 2007) that the tariff should be the mirror image of the cost of supply of electricity to a category of consumer . 19. the national ..... tribunal in the various cases. 47. the findings of the tribunal in the various cases are summarized as under keeping in view the amendment made in the electricity act, 2003 in the year 2007: i) the pooled power purchase cost from all sources of supply to the distribution licensee has to be used for determination of cost .....

Reliance Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai Vs. the Maharahtra Electricity ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... demand of goods is distinctly homogenous throughout the country, and considering the absence of any regulatory trade barriers." b) whether the following decision is contrary to the competition act, 2002 for determining the relevant market for distribution business? "thus, as per the criteria laid down for identification of the relevant geographic market, the market ..... the genuineness of these documents has not been questioned or disputed by the appellant. but, the appellant strenuously submits that except the order dated 23.4.2007 passed by the state commission; other orders have not been referred to and considered by the state commission in the impugned order. he has also cited the ..... suppliers as the licensee has been purchasing as on the date of issue of these conditions. 1. the next order is myt tariff order dated 23.4.2007 passed by the state commission for the appellants distribution business giving the direction. the relevant portion is as follows:- r. as regards the short term power .....

In the Matter Of: Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. Gujarat Vs. Gujarat ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... 15% from the tariff determined by the commission for the excess energy available after captive use (set off) on the basis of the amendment made in wind power policy, 2007, without applying the competitive bidding rate or rates determined by the commission in order no. 2 of 2006. we further clarify that the order no. 2 of ..... up state electricity board and others (1997) 7 scc 251. vii. the wind power policy (first amendment) 2007 dated 7.1.2009 itself provided as follows:- 19 notwithstanding anything contained in this resolution, the provisions of the electricity act 2003 and gerc regulations, as issued from time to time, shall prevail, for the purpose of implementation ..... wind energy projects. in exercise of the powers conferred under section 181 read with sections 61(h), 62(a) and 86(1)(e) of the electricity act, 2003 (act 36 of 2003) and all other powers enabling it in this behalf, the gujarat electricity regulatory commission (the commission) has determined the price for procurement of .....

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd Vs. M/S. Lanco ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... first respondent for the purchase of 113.2 mw of electricity on 1.9.2003. (b) the respondent-1 is an independent power producer selected through an international competitive bidding process to construct, run and operate a 113.2 mw natural gas based power plant. as per the ppa dated 1.9.2003, the entire power generated by ..... 12.2004 and 11.8.2005. low power factor penalty as mentioned above was initially charged erroneously. as mentioned above, this was subsequently refunded way back in january, 2007 itself as recommended by the committee considering that the similarly placed other independent power producers in the state were not charged with low power factor penalty. 32. despite this, ..... accordingly, the refund of rs.77,33,116.80 was sanctioned and the same was refunded on 8.1.2007. 28. thus, the request for the refund had been acceded by the committee and the report of the committee was acted upon by the appellant. 29. after about 3 years of the refund of the amount, the appellant suddenly .....

Gajendra Haldea S/O Late Shri Rao Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL203

..... transmission of electricity; (iii) wheeling of electricity; and (iv) retail sale of electricity. this interpretation seems to be in conformity with the purpose of the act as it will encourage competition and will give fillip to the generation of electricity. it will unleash the energy sector which was hitherto strangled and strangulated by controls. it is this evil ..... section by the state commission having jurisdiction in respect of the licensee who intends to distribute electricity and make payment therefor: (6) a tariff order shall, unless amended or revoked, shall continue to be in force for such period as may be specified in the tariff order.35. thus, it is clear from a reading ..... interprets the law and cannot legislate it. if a provision of law is misused and subjected to the abuse of process of law, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it, if deemed necessary. (see rishabh agro industries ltd. v. p.n.b. capital services ltd.). the legislative casus omissus cannot be .....

isn International Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Electricity Regulatory

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... build, own and operate basis and discussions you had with government. i am directed to inform you that your offer for partabpur thermal power project along with subsequent amendments has been approved by the government with the following conditions: 1. that you will initial ppa for partabpur project with upseb within a month of receipt of this ..... accordance with the guidelines issued by the central government," to meet the conditions of section 63 of the act. for a slew of other reasons also, the tariff proposed in the petition by the petitioner cannot be said to have been result of competitive bidding process. when the proposal was invited, the state of up was the only beneficiary. however, ..... with a prayer for fixing tariff as agreed to and included in the ppas subject to adoption and approval by cerc. the impugned order dated 23rd march, 2007 was passed on this tariff petition. the appellant sought a review of this order. the review petition was dismissed vide an order dated 27th august .....

M/S Noida Power Company Limited, Commercial Complex Vs. Paschimanchal ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... amendment act, 2003, scope of application of prudency has been restricted only to defining additional requirements of capital adequacy, credit worthiness and code of conduct. therefore, the requirement of minimum area as specified under rules 2005 apparently runs contrary to the spirit of the main act. the national electricity policy also only provided that the competition ..... board, mussoorie (1985) 2 scc 16 at para 7; (iii) lic v-escorts (1986) 1 scc para 61 to 63 (iv) puravankara projects ltd v-venus international (2007) 10 scc 33 para 18, 19, 22, 24, 30, 37; (v) atlas cycle industries ltd-v-state of haryana (1979) 2 scc 196 paras 19-22, 32. ..... of minimum area for grant of distribution license finds mention only under the explanation given in the rules, 2005. since under the provisions of the electricity (amendment) act, 2003 the scope of application of proviso has been restricted only to defining the additional requirement of capital adequacy, credit worthiness and code of conduct, the .....

In the Matter Of: Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. Neyveli Lignite Cor ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... statutes concerned, as they are with a economic and social activities, the regulation must of necessity, receive so wide an interpretation that in certain situations, it must exclude competition to the public sector from the private sector. 39. in view of the above dictum laid down by the honble supreme court in the decisions referred to above ..... rebate till such time it opens lc and directed the tneb to refund or adjust the excess rebate amount within a period of 2 months. so, on 31.12.2007 acting on the proposal of the nlc, the tneb opened a back-up lc and has been availing the benefit of 2% rebate upon making the payment of the bills ..... . in support of his submissions and the impugned order, the learned counsel for the respondent has cited the following decisions: (1) u.p. panchayat adhikari sangh v. daya ram saroj. (2007) 2 scc 138. (2) dawoodi bohra community v. state of maharashtra. (2005) 2 scc 673. (3) bharat petroleum corporation limited v. mumbai shramik sangha. (2001) 4 scc 448. .....

Mula Pravara Electric Vs. Maharashtra Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL135

..... applicable to generating companies and transmission licensees; b. the generation, transmission, distribution and supply of electricity are conducted on commercial principles; c. the factors which would encourage competition, efficiency, economical use of the resources, good performance and optimum investments; d. safeguarding of consumers' interest and at the same time, recovery of the cost of ..... retail sale to the consumers in the area of such persons would be as determined for the licensee by the appropriate commission. 9.15. if not determined competitively, the bpp should be set on a normative basis based on representative consumer mix and should not vary on a case-to- case basis. the bpp ..... 's application for tariff and that the functions of commission are distinct under the act and in the circumstances, commission had to revise the tariff of the appellant in order to bridge the revenue gap in order dated february 23, 2007 in case no. 51 of 2005.37. responding to the allegation that the .....