Petition No. 13 of 2004
Date of hearing: June 27, 2006
Date of Order: August 14, 2006

This petition has been filed on Augus , 2004 seeking deemed licensee status for the petitioner and to introduce a separate tariff category for Bulk Supply to the Defence Forces in Cantonments, Air Force Stations and other Defence Establishments located in the State of Punjab. On admittance of petition, the Punjab State Electricity Board filed a reply in which it stated that it had already proposed in its draft Sales Regulations a separate category of tariff for MES, identical to its Bulk Supply category and the same is to be approved by the Commission.

Mr. B.C. Shiv appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner being a deemed licensee, may not be equated with any other bulk consumer and that separate tariff may be fixed for them. He has further argued that as MES is not a commercial organization, their tariff should be less than the other commercial and industrial consumers. It is also contended that the tariff of the petitioner should be fixed on the basis of category-wise cost of supply and not on the average cost of supply. On the other hand it is urged on behalf of the Board that supply by MES to retail consumers in designated areas is similar to power supply to other bulk consumers such as Punjab Agricultural University, Government Hospitals and Staff Colonies. For that reason, the same tariff as that of bulk supply has been proposed for the petitioner as well.

The arguments advanced by the parties have been heard. The Commission noted that a letter dated 26.7.2004 had been received from the Director, Ministry of Power, Govt. of India which clarified that MES, a subordinate organization of the Ministry of Defence entrusted with and consequently engaging in supply of electricity meets the requirement as provided in the 3^rd proviso to Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and as such qualifies to be a deemed licensee. The Commission had thereupon, in its order dated 17/18.8.2004, decided to treat MES as a deemed licensee. Having acquired that status, the petitioner is now free to purchase power either from the Board or any other source. If it chooses to purchase power from the former then tariff therefor is to be fixed by the Commission and this exercise had been completed in the Tariff Order for the year 2006-07. While doing so, the views of the petitioner had been taken into consideration. The Co! mmission is, therefore, of the view that there is, at this stage, no scope to review the tariff applicable to the petitioner who is, however, free to file objections at the time when the ARR and Tariff Application for the year 2007-08 is being processed.