Petition No. 38 of 2007
Date of Order: 18.2.2008

This petition has been filed by M/s Indian Acrylics Ltd seeking review of the Tariff Order dated September 17, 2007 passed by the Commission for the year 2007-08 in so far as it pertains to parallel operation charges. It is stated in the petition that on a proposal of the Board, parallel operation charges payable by a consumer have been discontinued in the Tariff Order dated September 17, 2007 passed by the Commission for the year 2007-08. The petitioner had, it is further averred, raised the issue of withdrawing these charges in Petition No.18/2002 but the same has not been adjudicated upon by the Commission. The petitioner has accordingly urged that the withdrawal of these charges ought to have been with effect from June 2002, or atleast from 1st April 2007.

Arguments have been heard on the point of maintainability of the petition in view of Regulation 64 of the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2005 whereby review is allowed only on three following grounds:-

1. grounds arising from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence, which after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the applicant’s knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was passed; or
2. on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of record; or
3. for any other sufficient reason.

It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that the petition is maintainable as there is an error in the order apparent on the face of the record.

Petition No.18/2002 referred to by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn. In the Tariff Orders for the year 2002-03 to 2006-07 these charges have been ordered to be continued. In the order dated March 30, 2007 passed by the Commission in Petition No.1 of 2007, tariff structure for the year 2006-07 was ordered to be continued till the date of issue of Tariff Order for the year 2007-08. In view of this, parallel operation charges which were continued in the Tariff Order for the year 2006-07 remained payable till August 31, 2007. Tariffs fixed by the Commission in its Tariff Order for the year 2007-08 have been made effective from September 1, 2007 and parallel operation charges have also been discontinued with effect from the same date. The Commission is, therefore, unable to discern any error in the order apparent on the face of the record. The petition also does not disclose any discovery of new and important matter or evidence. The third ground of “any other sufficient reason” is also to be atleast analogous to the first two grounds as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. As no ground for review as mentioned in Regulation 64 is made out, this petition is not maintainable and is dismissed as such.

sd/-	Sd/-	sd/-
(Satpal Singh Pall)	(Baljit Bains)	(Jai Singh Gill)
Member	Member	Chairman



Chandigarh
Dated: February 18, 2008