Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson: 1. Lanco Amarkantak Power Limited is the Appellant herein. This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the impugned order dated 17.10.2012 passed by the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) in the Application filed by the Appellant for tariff determination pursuant to the Remand order passed by the Honble Supreme Court. 2. The short facts are as follows:- a) The Appellant is a generating Company. It has established a Coal based thermal power project in Korba District, Chhattisgarh. b) The 1st Respondent is the State Commission. c) The Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd (Haryana Power) is the 2nd Respondent which is a Government of Haryana undertaking operating and maintaining generating stations in the State of Haryana. d) The PTC India Ltd., is the Respondent No.3. It is licensed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission to undertake trading in electricity as an Inter-State electricity trader. e) Chhat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Rakesh Nath, Technical Member 1. This Appeal has been preferred by Wardha Power Company Ltd. against the order dated 30.04.2012 passed by Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) in the petition filed by the Appellant seeking recovery of dues for supply of electricity in terms of the Power Purchase Agreement. 2. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. is the Respondent no.1. The State Commission is the Respondent no.2. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under:- 3.1 The Appellant is a generating company which has set up a power project with 4 units of 135 MW each in Maharashtra. The Appellant participated in the competitive bidding for procurement of power on short term basis by the distribution licensee, the Respondent no.1 herein, in terms of the guidelines for competitive bidding notified by the Central Government for supply of 300 MW power on round the clock basis. 3.2 The bid of the Appellant was accepted and subsequently a Power Purchase Agre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Surendra Kumar, Judicial Member: 1. The instant Appeal has been directed against the impugned tariff order dated 23rd March, 2012 passed by the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short OERC) in respect of Annual Revenue Requirement and Tariff Proposals submitted by 4 Distribution Companies (DISCOMs) in Orissa state viz Central Electricity Supply Utility of Orissa (CESU), Southern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa (SOUTHCO), Western Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd, (WESCO) and North Eastern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd. (NESCO) for the year 2012-13 for determination of distribution tariff, in respect of electric supply in Orissa state, wherein learned OERC had increased the demand charges for the H.T. and E.H.T. Railway Traction supply from existing Rs.200/- per KVA to Rs.250/- per KVA i.e. @ Rs.50/- per KVA and energy charges from Rs.4.70/KWH to 4.90/KWH i.e. @ 20 paise per KWH unit for E.H.T. Railway Traction and from Rs.4.75/KWH to Rs.4.95/KWH i.e. @...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson: 1. The comprehensive impugned tariff order for Wind Energy dated 31.7.2012 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Commission is challenged in these Appeals by different parties. 2. Beta Wind Farm Private Limited has filed the Appeal No.197 of 2012, Indian Wind Power Association has filed Appeal No.198 of 2012. The various Associations of Spinning Mills have filed the Appeal Nos 200, 208 of 2012 and 6 of 2013. Indian Wind Turbine Manufacturers Association has filed the Appeal No.201 of 2012. 3. Beta Wind Farm Private Limited, the Appellant in Appeal No.197 of 2012 is a Wind Energy Generator. 4. Indian Wind Power Associations, the Appellant in Appeal No.198 of 2012 is an Association of Wind Energy Generators. Indian Wind Turbine Manufacturers Association, the Appellant in Appeal No.201 of 2012 is an Association of manufacturers of Wind Turbines. 5. The various Associations of Spinning Mills who are the Appellants in Appeal No.200, 208 of 2012 and 6 of 2013 have...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson 1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited is the Appellant herein. 2. Aggrieved by the order dated 17.6.2011, directing the Appellant to pay the amount to be calculated by the generator, the 1st Respondent, after working of the invoices from the year 2001 to 2006, the Appellant has filed this Appeal. 3. The short facts are as follows: (a) PPN Power Company Private Limited, the 1st Respondent, is a Generating Company. The said Power Company entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, the predecessor of the Appellant, on 3.01.1997 for sale of the entire energy generated by the Power Generating Station pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Power Purchase Agreement. Thereafter, the PPN Power Company set up a 330.5 MW Power Generating Station. It had been generating power through a combine cycled gas turbine power station in Nagapattinam District of Tamil Nadu. The Power Company commenced its commerci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Surendra Kumar, Judicial Member. 1. The present appeal has been filed, under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003, by the petitioner/appellant NTPC Limited against the order dated 28.05.2013, passed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter called the Central Commission) in Petition No. 269 of 2009, relating to the determination of generation tariff for Talcher Super Thermal Power Station (STPS), Stage-II (2000 MW) for the period from 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2014. 2. In the impugned order, the Central Commission has disallowed the following items under additional capital expenditure, namely:- (a) Claim of Rs. 10.35 crore for purchase of Generator Transformer, (b) Claim of Rs. 23.21 crore for balance civil works, (c) Claim of Rs. 48 lakh for Energy Monitoring System (EMS) and (d) Claim of Rs. 4528 lakh for purchase of wagons and locos. 3. The Central Commission has erred in disallowing the above claims on the grounds such as; the new Generator Transformer will only b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson: 1. M/s. Davangere Sugar Company Limited is the Appellant herein. Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission is the First Respondent. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM), is the Second Respondent. 2. This Appeal has been filed as against the impugned order dated 24.1.2013 determining the amount of compensation to be paid by the Appellant to the BESCOM in view of 3rd party sale made by the Appellant through Open Access. 3. The short facts are as follows: (a) The Appellant is a Generating Company. It entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with KPTCL, the Transmission and Bulk Supply Licensee under Karnataka Reforms Act for the sale of power from its plant situated at Davangere on 17.1.2002. (b) The KPTCL on 5.7.2003 terminated the PPA between the Appellant and KPTCL without assigning any reason. Therefore, a Writ Petition was filed before the High Court against the said termination. (c) During the pendency of the said Writ Petition, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson 1. M/s. Karamchand Thaper and Bros. (C.S.) Ltd is the Appellant herein. M/S. M P Power Trading Co. Ltd is the First Respondent. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) is the Second Respondent. 2. The Appellant has filed this Appeal challenging the impugned order dated 21.2.2012 passed by the State Commission as against the Appellant upholding the contention of M.P State Trading Company Ltd (R-1) that the contract between them was a concluded contract. 3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this Appeal are as follows:- (a) M/s.MP Power Trading Company Limited (R-1) invited tenders through the Expression of Interest on 16.4.2009 for the sale of power on firm basis for the period from 16.7.2009 to 30.9.2009. In response to the same, M/s. Karamchand Thaper and Brothers (C.S ) Limited , the Appellant through its letter dated 21.4.2009 made the offer for purchase of the said power. Accepting the said offer, the M P Power Tra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson. 1. Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited (BESCOM), the Distribution Company, is the Review Petitioner herein. 2. The Petitioner BESCOM filed the Petition in OP No.26 of 2008 before the State Commission claiming compensation from M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited, the Generating Company, the 1st Respondent for the electricity sold by it to 3rd party during the subsistence of the Power Purchase Agreement between the Petitioner and the said Shamanur Sugars Limited. 3. This Petition was allowed by the State Commission directing the Generating Company to pay the compensation to the Petitioner Company. 4. As against the said order, the Shamanur Sugars Limited filed an Appeal before this Tribunal in Appeal No.44 of 2013. 5. After hearing the parties, this Tribunal allowed the Appeal filed by M/s. Shamanur Sugars Limited by the judgment dated 7.1.2014 holding that the BESCOM was not entitled to compensation. 6. Aggrieved by this judgment of this Tribunal, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson 1. Sree Rayalaseema Alkalies and Allied Chemicals Ltd has filed this Appeal challenging the main order dated 24.11.2011 passed in the OP No.24 of 2011 holding that the Appellant is liable to refund the tax collected from the purchasers as well as the order dated 17.5.2012 passed in Review Petition No.2 of 2012 holding that no ground was made out for Review of the main order. 2. The short facts are as follows: (a) The Government of Karnataka had invited bids for setting up of multi fuel power plants in Karnataka through its Notification dated 25.11.1995. (b) In response to the said notification, the Appellant, M/s. Royalaseema Alkalies and Allied Chemicals Ltd. submitted its bid to set up a multi fuel power plant at Tagginabudihal village of Bellary District. This was accepted by the Government. Accordingly, the PPA was entered into between the Appellant and the Karnataka Electricity Board on 15.12.1977. (c) The Appellant, accordingly set up the plant a...
Tag this Judgment!