Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka traffic control act 1960 section 17 power to make rules for control of public vehicles Court: appellate tribunal for electricity aptel

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

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL203

..... scope of the two provisions is different. as already pointed out, under the original section 121 the chairperson had the jurisdiction of general superintendence and control over the appropriate commissions, while present section 121 of the act confers power on the appellate tribunal to issue, from time to time, such orders, instructions or directions as it deems fit, to the regulatory commissions ..... transfer schemes for the transfer of the assets and staff into successor companies. orissa, haryana, andhra pradesh, karnataka, rajasthan and uttar pradesh have passed their reform acts and unbundled their state electricity boards into separate companies. delhi and madhya pradesh have also enacted their reforms acts which, inter alia, envisage unbundling/ corporatisation of sebs. 3. with the policy of encouraging private sector participation .....

Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Co. Ltd. Vs. Chhattisgarh State ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... lead to cross subsidies reaching unsustainable levels (c) involvement of the government in determination of tariff. 23) the objectives of the act can similarly be identified as under: (a) in encouraging private sector participation in the electricity industry (b) tariff fixation by ..... , rajasthan and uttar pradesh have passed their reform acts and unbundled their state electricity boards into separate companies. delhi and madhya pradesh have also enacted their reforms acts which, inter alia, envisage unbundling/corporatisation of sebs. ..... acts. 2. starting with orissa, some state governments have been undertaking reforms through their own reform acts. these reforms have involved unbundling of the state electricity boards into separate generation, transmission and distribution companies through transfer schemes for the transfer of the assets and staff into successor companies. orissa, haryana, andhra pradesh, karnataka .....

Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Vs. Karnataka Electricity Re ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... stated that it is a distribution company and does not undertake transmission of electricity in the state of karnataka which is undertaken by karnataka power transmission corporation limited (kptcl). moreover, the appellants have no control over the transmission losses. the commission erred in accounting for the transmission losses while calculating the revenue ..... it is contended by the commission that the kerc (power procurement from renewable sources by distribution licensees) regulations, 2004 under the provisions of the electricity act, 2003 had been gazetted on october 10, 2004. these regulations were finalized after giving an opportunity to all stakeholders including appellant licensees and nodal agencies ..... to plan in advance and should be in a position to supply power as demanded from time to time. section 42, 43 of the electricity act 2003 also should not be lost sight of. to meet the ever increasing demand consequent to development and improvement in the status of the consumer .....

Vbc Ferro Alloys Limited., Hyderabad and Others Vs. Karnataka Electric ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction

..... advanced on behalf of the respondents, though look attractive, deserve to be rejected on closer examination. it is observed from the records that when power corporation of karnataka ltd. (pckl) on behalf of the petitioner sought for approval for purchase of power at the rates obtained through the bid from the respondents, this commission considered ..... ) konaseema gas power limited are the appellants herein. 2. they have filed this appeal as against the impugned order dated 13.1.2012 passed by the karnataka state commission allowing the petition filed by bescom by directing the appellants to supply power to bescom as per the power purchase agreement dated 27.2.2009 entered ..... ppa. the same was duly communicated by the distribution licensee to the appellant. according to the appellant, the ppa has become impossible to be acted upon due to reasons beyond their control. in our view the ppa is valid till 31.12.2014. however, if according to the appellants, the ppa has become impossible to be .....

The South Indian Sugars Mills Vs. Karnataka Electricity

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

Reported in : (2007)LCAPTEL126

..... assistance on softer terms to nce projects based on the policy framework of the government of india. karnataka government also set up karnataka renewable energy development ltd. (kredl).5. section 62(1) of the electricity act, 2003 (the act) empowers the kerc to determine the tariff for supply of electricity by a generating company to ..... the distribution licensee in accordance with the provisions of the act. section 61 of the act stipulates that the ..... entered before 31^st march, 2008 for the period specified therein.29. before parting with the judgment we wish to record our appreciation for the karnataka electricity regulatory commission for issuing a comprehensive order for determination of tariff in respect of various renewable sources of energy. we also recognise the valuable .....

Tamilnadu State Electricity Board, Chennai Vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

..... rajasthan 4.28 4. west bengal 4.00 5. cerc 3.75 6. gujarat 3.56 7. andhra pradesh 3.50 8. maharashtra 3.50 9. karnataka 3.40 10. kerala 3.14 59. therefore, the contention of the appellant that the state commission has fixed a high tariff is incorrect. it is also ..... the commission proposes to retain the same features with some modifications based on the suggestions made by the stakeholders. as and when the distribution licensee enforces restriction control measures for restricting the consumption of wind energy generators, the commission finds justification the plea that the unutilized energy at the end of the financial year may ..... be provided by them on priority basis, if they are permitted to collect infrastructural development charges. the commission does not accept this plea because the electricity act 2003 makes it clear that it shall be the responsibility of the transmission utilities and the distribution licensee to create the appropriate infrastructure. therefore, the commission .....