(Order Passed on
30th November, 2002)
SHRI P.K. MEHROTRA
CHAIRMAN
SHRI SYED
IQBAL HUSAIN
MEMBER (P)
Petition No.
264/2002
IN THE MATTER OF
Determination of Board�s HT & LT Tariff application for various
categories
of consumers for the year 2002-03
Madhya Pradesh
State Electricity Board, - Petitioner/Applicant
Shakti Bhawan, Vidyut Nagar, Jabalpur
PETITION UNDER
CLAUSE-62 OF THE M.P. ELECTRICITY
REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONDUCT OF BUSINESS)
REGULATIONS, 1999 � FOR DETERMINATION OF TARIFF:
On behalf on MPSEB : Shri D. Roybardhan (Retd. E.D.
of MPSEB) OIC of the
Case Assisted by
Shri Bodh Kumar, Addl.
S.E.,
MPSEB and other team of
Officers.
The list of objectors from HT/LT
category consumers is separately annexed at Ann. I
Chapter
1
INTRODUCTION
1.2 In its Order dated 26th
September, 2001, the Commission directed (in clause 2.7 of the
Order) that MPSEB should file its Annual Revenue Requirement for the
succeeding financial year before October 31,2001 and the proposal
for fixation of tariff upto 30th November, 2001. The petitioner,
MPSEB, has however, filed the combined petition for ARR and tariff
proposal after a significant delay. It is directed that MPSEB must
ensure rigid observance of time schedule for Financial Year 2003-04
and subsequent years.
Procedural History
1.3 The Petitioner had brought an
application before the Commission on 20th May, 2002 and after
initial scrutiny of the Application in the Commission�s office a
technical session for validation of data was arranged on 9th and
10th August, 2002. During this validation session the team of the
following officers from MPSEB led by Shri D. Roybardhan, OSD
(Tariff) was present:
i) Shri D.S. Goindi,
Chief Engineer (Comm.)
ii) Shri R.P. Arora, Chief Engineer (O&M)
iii) Shri R.K. Saxena, Additional Chief Engineer
(Generation)
iv) Shri Chetan Jaiswal, Joint Director (Accounts)
v) Shri Bodh Kumar, Addl. SE and some other officers
1.4 On behalf of the Madhya
Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission the officers mentioned
below supported the Commission alongwith the Consultants, namely M/s
Power Finance Corporation Ltd.
i) Shri H.D.
Motiramani, Director (Engg.)
ii) Shri D.K. Dewan, Joint Director
iii) Shri S.K. Khiani, Dy. Director (Generation)
iv) Shri D.K. Vyas, Dy. Director (T&D)
v) Shri Ashok Sharma, Dy. Secretary
vi) Shri L.P. Sharma, Legal Assistant.
1.5 During the technical
session it was discovered that there were serious deficiencies in
the data provided with the petition and therefore, the petitioner
was directed to report on 26th August, 2002 with corrected and
complete information. The petitioner however failed to appear on
the appointed date and requested for extension of time, which was
allowed for one week. However, after one week, the MPSEB once again
requested for extension of time and eventually submitted the updated
information only on 23rd September 2002. After due scrutiny the
Commission accepted the Petition on 25th September 2002, and ordered
it to be registered as Petition No. 264 of 2002 (264/2002).
1.6 During the technical session and
also during subsequent meetings, the petitioner was asked by the
Commission to submit actual data for the year 2001-02, but there was
persistent request for more time by the officers of the Board.
1.7 It is regretted that till date
some items of the information required by the Commission have not
been made available and the Commission is left with no option but to
make assumptions and surmises. The Commission is disappointed at
the approach adopted by the Petitioner towards the requirement of
furnishing full and complete information for processing the tariff
request.
1.8 In the first Tariff Order passed
on 26th September 2001, the Commission had directed that:
i) The Board shall
ensure full compliance with the regulatory and procedural
requirements of the Commission while submitting its
petition/proposal for determination of tariff in future.
ii) The Board shall
supply information in the formats prescribed by the Commission in
the following manner:-
a. Information in forms prescribed in
Part I of the Appendix (�A� Series Forms) shall be filed annually on
or before 31st October of each year, irrespective of whether or not
tariff determination is sought for.
b. Information in forms
prescribed in Part II of the Appendix (�T� Series Forms) shall be
filed alongwith the proposal for tariff determination on or before
30th November each year.
1.9 An important development that
has taken place in the management of Madhya Pradesh State
Electricity Board must be mentioned here. The State Government
(Energy Department) issued an Order (vide No.5555/RS/4//13/2001
dated 1st July, 2002) stating that for the purpose of reorganization
of M.P. State Electricity Board, five companies named below have
been incorporated as wholly owned Government of Madhya Pradesh
Undertakings and as Limited Companies under the Companies Act, 1956:
a) Madhya Pradesh Power Generation Company Ltd., (b) Madhya Pradesh
Power Transmission Company Ltd. (c) Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra
Vidyut Vitran Company Ltd. (d) Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut
Vitran Company Ltd. and (e) Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut
Vitran Company Ltd. The Power Generation Company and Transmission
Company were incorporated in November 2001 while the Distribution
Companies were incorporated in May 2002. The Order further provides
that the five companies will be acting as the Agents of the MPSEB
and business will be conducted in the name of MPSEB only and
consumer bills shall continue to be raised in the name of MPSEB.
These companies have an Operation & Management agreement with the
MPSEB, which is effective from July 1, 2002 subject to the five
companies obtaining the certificate of commencement of business.
1.10 An application was moved
before the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission on 28th
June, 2002 by Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board seeking the
approval and consent of the M.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission
under Section 21(2) of Madhya Pradesh Vidyut Sudhar Ahiniyam, 2000
for implementation of the Operation & Management Agreement proposed
between MPSEB and the Transmission and the Distribution Companies
set-up by the State Government. It may be mentioned here that the
Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company is to take over the
distribution and retail supply activities in the Commissionaires of
Bhopal, Hoshangabad, Gwalior and Chambal; the Poorva Kshetra Vidyut
Vitran Company is to take over the distribution and retail supply
activities in the Commissionaires of Jabalpur, Rewa and Sagar; and
the Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company is to take over the
distribution and retail supply activities of Commissionaires of
Indore and Ujjain. While dealing with the application of Madhya
Pradesh State Electricity Board filed on 28th June, 2002, the Madhya
Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission passed an Order on 16th
July, 2002, in which it has been held that the Operation and
Management Arrangements shall be only an internal arrangement
between the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board and the Companies
concerned and the same will not, in any manner, affect rights of any
third party or the consumers. The Commission further directed that
a valid licence is a requirement under section 14 of Vidyut Sudhar
Adhiniyam, 2000 and it provides for certain duties and obligations
to be fulfilled by the Companies for entering into the business.
The Commission held that the Transmission and Distribution Companies
should make applications for grant of licence as per procedure
prescribed within 2 months of the date of the Order (16th July,
2002) and that the State Government should finalise the rules and
transfer scheme as per provision of Section 23 of Vidyut Sudhar
Adhiniyam 2000 within the next 6 months of the Order (16th July,
2002). The Distribution Companies and the Transmission Company have
sought extension of time for moving an application for obtaining the
requisite licence and have been permitted time till 30th November,
2002.
1.11 The Chief Minister�s
Conference held in March, 2001 had noted that large amount of dues
owed by the SEBs to the Central Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs)
was a major impediment to reforms and resolved to constitute an
Expert Group to recommend a one time settlement of outstanding dues
and recommend a programme for medium term restructuring and reform
of the SEBs. The Group was constituted under the Chairmanship of
Shri M.S. Ahluwalia, Member, Planning Commission. Whether SEBs
should remain liable or should the dues be paid by the State
Governments was the major concern for the consideration of the
Expert Group. The Expert Group�s report states that if SEBs are
viewed as purely commercial enterprises, then they should be held
responsible for settling their dues. However, the Group also noted
that �if this approach is followed, the SEBs would have to meet the
rescheduled debt service obligation in future, in addition to
meeting their liabilities. The reality is that they will find the
task of meeting current obligations very formidable, and it is,
therefore, difficult to believe that they will be able to cover past
dues also, unless power tariffs in future are not only raised to
economic levels as required to ensure viability (after taking
account of normative improvements in efficiency which they are
expected to achieve) but also consciously set even higher than these
levels to provide a margin for repayment. The Group noted that
regulatory authorities were unlikely to agree to build in a cushion
in future tariffs to allow for payment of past dues.�
In view of these considerations, the
Group felt that it was appropriate for the State Governments to take
on the liability of the SEBs and to discharge it in future from
general revenues. The State Government (Energy Deptt.) vide their
letter dated 25.11.2002 has confirmed that, they have in principle
agreed to implement Montek Singh Ahluwalia Committee�s
recommendations for settlement of outstanding dues of CPSUs.
Tripartite agreement for NTPC has already been signed. For dues
pertaining to other CPSUs, the approval of Government has been
sought and is being processed.
1.12 Advantages to SEBs
The above recommendation would help
the SEBs to clean their balance sheets and place them in a position
where they can concentrate on solving the current deficit problem,
which itself is formidable.
1.13 Since passing of the
first Tariff Order in September 02, the State Government and MPSEB
have entered into an Agreement with the Asian Development Bank for
bringing about restructuring and reforms in the working of MPSEB.
There was no intimation to the MPERC either from the State
Government or the MPSEB about the conditions and the terms included
in the Agreement. It is necessary that the MPSEB makes available
the details of the Agreement entered into with the Asian Development
Bank and the obligations and conditions which have been imposed on
the Board in lieu of the acceptance of the loan. In their petition
MPSEB have stated in paragraph 2.1.5 �Incidentally, the MPSEB has
proceeded towards restructuring and reform activities under the
guidance and expertise of Asian Development Bank (ADB). Success of
reform programme depends on the restructuring of electricity sector
and the development and implementation on sound commercial
principles. The elements of reform and restructuring of the
electricity sector include:-
� unbundling of generation,
transmission and distribution
� formation of separate
independent distribution companies (DISCOMS) of manageable size
� the introduction of private
investment to this sector�
1.14 In the petition, the
MPSEB has mentioned regarding their loan repayment liability towards
ADB loan, but have not informed the Commission regarding the terms
and conditionalities imposed by the ADB. The Commission expects the
Board and the Government to provide the details of these
negotiations with the ADB to the Commission.
1.15 In their petition, the
MPSEB has stressed the need for timely revision of tariff and has
bemoaned the delays in doing so in the past. It has cited the fact
that before the setting up of the Regulatory Commission, the Board
could get a revision in Tariff only at average intervals of 2�
years, i.e. in July, 1996, in March, 1999 and in October, 2001. The
Vidyut Sudhar Adhiniyam has given the opportunity to the petitioner
Board to request for Tariff Revision once a year. We are now in the
third quarter of the Financial Year 2002-03 and by this time the
MPSEB should have got ready with their proposal for 2003-04. If the
Board fails in its obligations to submit the petition in time, then
it has to bear the consequences for the same. The delayed action by
the MPSEB will no doubt have an adverse impact on their financial
health.
1.16 The Commission published
the gist of the Tariff Proposals received from the Petitioner Board
in the leading newspapers of Madhya Pradesh inviting
objections/suggestions/comments of the interested persons and the
State Government. The public notices were published in the
following newspapers:
S.No. |
Name of Newspaper |
Edition |
Date of Publication |
1. |
Dainik Bhaskar (Hindi) |
All editions |
30.09.2002 |
2. |
Nai Duniya (Hindi) |
Indore edition |
01.10.2002 |
3. |
Nava Bharat (Hindi) |
Jabalpur edition |
01.10.2002 |
4. |
Hindustan Times (English) |
Bhopal edition |
30.09.2002 |
1.17 The Commission held
public hearings and meetings with the objectors on the petition
filed by MPSEB at the following places:-
Sr.No. |
Place of Hearing |
Date |
1. |
Indore |
28th & 29th October,
2002 |
2. |
Gwalior |
31st October, 2002 |
3. |
Jabalpur |
7th November, 2002 |
4. |
Rewa |
8th November, 2002 |
5. |
Bhopal |
11th November, 2002 |
1.18 Before the commencement
of public hearings, a meeting of the State Advisory Committee of the
Electricity Regulatory Commission, constituted under Section 33 of
Vidyut Sudhar Adhiniyam, was convened. This meeting was held at
Bhopal on 24th October, 2002.
1.19 After the first Tariff
Order was passed on 26.09.2001, the first Chairman of the
Electricity Regulatory Commission, Justice (Retd.) Shacheendra
Dwivedi has superannuated on 24th January, 2002. His successor was
appointed vide M.P. Government Order dated 11.03.2002 and he joined
on 14th March, 2002. Member, Shri Rabindra Tripathy also
superannuated on 20th September, 2002 and since then the Commission
is working with only two Members (including the Chairman).
In the
subsequent chapters, the performance review of MPSEB during the
preceding few years and the action taken by the Board on the
directives given by the Commission in the first tariff order have
been discussed in detail alongwith an analysis of the proposals made
by the petitioner and the objections and comments received during
the public hearing meetings. |