Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON 1. M/S Noida Power Company Ltd is the Appellant. The 1st Respondent is Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) is the 2 Respondent. By the order dated 11.12.2009, the State Commission, granted a parallel/second distribution licence to the Respondent No.1 (Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Meerut), in the Greater NOIDA area which is the licenced area of M/S Noida Power Company Limited, the Appellant. 2. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant has filed this Appeal. The short facts which are relevant are as follows: (i) The Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority promoted the M/S Noida Power Company Ltd, the Appellant, as the ‘Special Purpose Vehicle for the specific purpose of undertaking distribution and supply of electricity to the consumers in the Greater Noida area. (ii) On 30th August, 1993, the Appellant was granted a licence by the Government of Uttar Pradesh u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. What should have been the tariff for co-generation units in the State of Karnataka and whether the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission who is the respondent no.7 in this appeal has rightly determined the tariff in respect of the units co-generating electricity in that State by its order dated 11.12.2009 are the questions posed before us in this appeal preferred by the South India Sugar Mills Association (Karnataka), a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 which is a conglomeration of 30 Co-generators. 2. According to the appellant, the total generation of electricity from co-generation is about 400 MWs. In the matter of fixing the price of non-firm power particularly from the non- conventional sources, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) framed CERC (Terms and Conditions for Tariff Determination from Renewable Energy Sources) Regulations, 2009 which came into effect from 16th September, 2009. The State Com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
MR. JUSTICE M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON 1. Indian Energy Exchange Limited is the Appellant. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Central Commission) is the first Respondent. Power Exchange India Limited is the second Respondent. 2. The Central Commission on 3.6.2010 passed the impugned order holding that the professional Members of the Appellant Exchange dealing with the money from their clients have violated the Regulations as well as its earlier order dated 24.12.2009 and thereby directing them to implement the same with immediate effect. 3. After the impugned order, was passed, the Appellant filed a petition before the Central Commission seeking extension of time for implementation of the said order. However, the Central Commission dismissed the said petition by the order dated 15.7.2010. 4. The Appellant has challenged both these orders dated 3.6.2010 and 15.7.2010 in this Appeal. The short facts that are relevant for disposal of this Appeal are as follows:- (i) The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. The Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.04.2009 passed in Misc. Application No. 06 of 2009 and the order dated 10th May, 2010 passed in Review Petition No. 967 of 2009 by the Gujarat State Electricity Commission, the Respondent No. 1 herein. The Respondent No. 2 is a consumers right organization in India and duly recognized by the Government of Gujarat, Respondent No. 3 is an institution registered under Bombay Public Trust Act and is running various educational institutions said to be on commercial basis at Vidyanagar, and espondent No. 4 is a State Government enterprise incorporated under the Companies Act. 1956 and is a bulk purchaser of power in the State of Gujarat for sale to the distribution companies including the Appellant. The Respondent No. 3 is a high tension consumer (HT) of the Appellant. The said Respondent No. 3 entered into an agreement on 08.02.2007 with the Appellant for supply of electricity against 300 KVA cont...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
V.J. Talwar, Technical Member: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) is the Appellant. 1. Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) is the first Respondent. Gujarat Electricity Transmission Corporation (GECTO) is the second Respondent. 3rd 4th and 5th Respondents are distribution licensees in the State of Gujarat. 2. Aggrieved by the impugned Order of State Commission dated 23.9.2009 in respect of wheeling charges for wheeling power from Captive Wind Energy Generators setup by the Appellant in the State of Gujarat through Transmission system of GECTO (R‐2) to various locations for its own use, ONGC, the Appellant has filed this Appeal. 3. Material facts of this case are given below. 4. State Commission (R‐1) notified Regulations for Procurement of Power from Renewable Sources on 29.9.2005. Government of Gujarat (State Government) issued Wind Power Policy 2007 on 13.6.2007 to encourage generation of electricity from Renewable Sources of Energy in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) is the Appellant in both these Appeals in Appeal No. 12 of 2010 and Appeal No. 116 of 2010. Since common issues have been raised in these Appeals, the common judgment is being rendered though the impugned orders are different. 2. The Appeal 12/2010 has been filed as against the impugned order dated 14.10.2009. The Appeal 116/2010 has been filed as against the impugned order dated 25.2.2010. 3. Let us now deal with the relevant facts in each of the Appeals. Appeal No. 12 of 2010 4. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) is the Appellant. M/s TCP Limited is the 1st Respondent. This Appeal filed by the TNEB is directed against the order passed by the State Commission (R-2) dated 14.10.2009 in the Petition DRP No. 18 of 2008 filed by the M/s TCP Limited, the 1st Respondent as against the Appellant. 5. The 1st Respondent, M/s TCP Limited is having a captive power plant at Gummidipoondi, Thiruvallur District in Tamil Nad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. Appeal No. 113 of 2010 and another being No. 115 of 2010 are being disposed of by this common judgment and order in view of the fact that both the Appeals arise out of identical question of fact and thus deserving a common treatment on this question of law whether agreement not in consonance with the law has to give way to the law. In Appeal No. 113 of 2010 facts are as under:- 2. The Respondent No.1, namely, OPG Energy (P) Ltd., had a captive generating plant having a generator with capacity of 17.5 MW in respect of which wheeling approval was accorded by the Appellant in respect of the said 17.5 MW of power which was, however, revised and reduced on the request of Respondent No.1 on account of shortage of supply of gas by Gas Authority of India Ltd., from 17.5 MW to 10 MW. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission, which is the Respondent No.2 herein, passed an order on 17.07.2008 directing the Appellant to revise the wheeling approval to that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Appellant who is the successor in interest of the erstwhile Chhatisgarh State Electricity Board has preferred this appeal being aggrieved with the order dated 15.04.2010 passed by the Chhatisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Respondent No. 3 herein, whereby in course of adjudication upon the revision in the matter of determination of tariff for purchase of electricity generated by the biomass power plants in the State the Commission directed revision in fuel price to be applicable retrospectively with effect from 1.4.2009. 2. The biomass power producers through their Association which is the Respondent No. 1 herein filed a petition being petition No. 7/2005 on 4.5.2005 before the Commission seeking, inter alia, certain concessions and relaxations with respect to the tariff determination and other charges payable by them for generation and sale of electricity. The Commission, however, by the order dated 11.11.2005 disposed of the said petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
P.S. DATTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Appellant who is a successor in interest of M/s. Tata Tea Ltd. and a Licensee under Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for the purpose of distribution of electricity in its licensed area, namely, Munnar in the State of Kerala preferred this Appeal against the order dated 25.5.2010 passed by the Kerala Electricity Regulatory Commission (KERC) Respondent No.1 whereby the tariff of the Appellant who, according to the Appellant, was consuming for itself less than 50% of the total energy purchased by it from the Kerala Sate Electricity Board (Board), Respondent No. 2, was passed with retrospective effect from 1.12.2007. 2. The facts are these: Transfer of interest of M/s. Tata Tea Ltd., a distribution licensee in favour of the Appellant was effected on 9.1.2007 and the order therefor was passed on 26.3.2007. On 4.7.2007, the Board who is the Respondent No. 2 filed a Tariff Petition before the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission for the year...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON M/s GVK Power (Goindwal Sahib) Limited is the Appellant. The Punjab State Commission is the 1st Respondent. Punjab State Electricity Board is the 2nd Respondent. 2. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 6.3.2009, passed by the Punjab State Commission in the petition filed by the Punjab State Electricity Board for approval of the amended and restated Power Purchase Agreement entered into between the Appellant and the Respondents for the generation and sale of electricity by the Appellant to the Respondents, the Appellant has filed this Appeal. 3. The necessary facts for the disposal of this Appeal are as follows: (i) M/s GVK Power Limited, the Appellant, is a generating company setting up a Thermal Power Project at Goindwal Sahib to supply electricity to the Electricity Board. (ii) In the year 1996, the Government of Punjab formulated an international competitive bidding process for inviting proposal and selection of competitors to establish a Coal...
Tag this Judgment!