Petition 4-2003


	PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
SCO 220-221 SECTOR-34-A CHANDIGARH

	Petition No.4 of 2003.
			 Date of hearing: June 17, 2004.
			 Date of order : July  23 , 2004.

In the matter of :    Petition u/s 22 & 29 of the Electricity Regulatory
			  Commission Act, 1998 read with Section 9, 42 & 86 
			  of the Electricity Act, 2003 for determining terms 
			  and conditions to  be fixed between the parties in
			  respect  of sale/ wheeling of surplus power of the
			  petitioner.

				AND

In the matter of:

			  M/s. Khanna Paper Mills Private Limited Amritsar

					Versus

			  State of Punjab and others.



Present:		  Sh. R.S.Mann, Chairman.
			  Sh. L.S.Deol, Member.


For the petitioner: 	  Mr. Y.P. Mehra  and Sh. Tirlok Singh.


For the PSEB:	  	  Sh. N.K.Khanna, Director.
			  Sh. V.K.Shanan, Dy.Director/ Sales
			  Sh. G.S.Kang.


ORDER:

The amended petition filed by the Petitioner on September 18, 2003 is against the charges levied by the Board on the petitioner.The Petitioner has made number of prayers as indicted in the Petition. All these relate to various deposits made and charges levied by the Board.

The Petitioner has put forth numerous technical and other arguments against the charges being imposed by the Board on them. The Petitioner has also stated that the CPP Policy of the Board circulated vide Commercial Circular Nos.26 and 60 of 2002 is no longer in vogue in view of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and as such, the governing conditions imposed by the Board while granting permission on December 18, 2000 for additional TG Set of 10 MW as CPP are also required to be re-defined as per the Act.
The Board in its reply has stated that the deposits have been got made and the charges levied under the Regulations framed by the Board. The Board has also stated that these Regulations are still in vogue in terms of sections 14, 172(d), 182 and 185 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Board has further stated that these Regulations are being uniformly followed by the Board for all consumers of this category.
The arguments advanced by the parties have been heard. The Petitioner has admitted that the deposits and the charges are as per the Regulations of the Board. The Petitioner has only disputed the validity of the Regulations of the Board in view of the coming into force of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Commission notes that both the parties are in agreement that the charges are as per Regulations framed by the Board under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The Commission also notes that the Regulations continue to be in force at least for a period of one year or till the revised Regulations are framed by the Commission under the new Act, whichever is earlier. As the revised Regulations are yet to be framed by the Commission, erstwhile Regulations continued to be in force at least till June 10, 2004. The Commission in its Tariff Order dated May 23, 2003 for the financial year 2003-04, has held that all other charges which are being collected by the Board as per Sales Regulations for supply of energy to the consumers will continue at the existing rates. Thus, implicitly Sales Regulations have approval of the Commission for continuance for the financial year 2003-04. The Commission, vide its order dated April 6,2004 passed in Petition No.4 of 2004, has further extended applicab ility of tariff structure for the year 2003-04 for another six months i.e. upto September 30,2004. Thus the charges leviable under the Regulations of the Board continue to apply till September 30, 2004. The Commission also notes that the validity of the Regulations has been challenged in the High Court. So the Commission concludes that the existing Sales Regulations will continue to apply till September 30, 2004 unless the revised Regulations are put in place before that date or the Sales Regulations are set aside by the High Court. As such,the charges levied by the Board in the instant case are in order.
Regarding Electricity Duty, the Commission notes that the Electricity Duty is levied by the State Government under the Punjab Electricity Duty Act and may not be said to be covered under the provisions of the Electricity Act,2003.The petitioner is free to approach the State Government in this regard.

In view of above, the petition is dismissed.

	Sd/-					sd/-

	(L.S.Deol)				(R.S.Mann)
	Member					Chairman


Place: Chandigarh.
Dated: July  23, 2004.