Tamil Nadu power regulator denies irregularities, defends govt

CHENNAI: Hitting back at a former TNEB employee who filed a petition alleging that the state suffered losses to the tune of Rs 1 lakh crore because of delayed power projects and purchase of power from private players, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Commission (TNERC) has denied irregularities and said the revision of power tariff was done according to rules.
TNERC secretary P Sivanandam, in an affidavit, said the Electricity Act, 2003 vested statutory powers with the commission, but the petitioner, C Selvaraj, instead of approaching it, had directly moved the high court. Sivanandan said the petition was filed in “complete ignorance of writ jurisdiction” and was “abuse of power of law.”
On Selvaraj’s plea to revoke the distribution licence of TNEB and appoint an administrator to manage its affairs, the affidavit said as the board did not breach any provisions of the Electricity Act, the plea was “made in a routine way, without application of mind.” It said cancellation of licence would “throw the entire system into disarray and cause undue hardship to the people.” Further, the appointment of an administrator was “an uphill task”, it said.
Selvaraj had sought constitution of an SIT comprising eminent citizens such as former CAG Vinod Rai to probe the scam. On this, Sivanandan’s affidavit said this meant the petitioner wanted an individual of his choice for the investigation.
The affidavit also defended the power purchase from private players. “TNEB was under compulsory obligation to maintain uninterrupted power supply in the state. As power generation by Tangedco was insufficient, it had to purchase power from central generating stations, independent power producers, and private players. National electricity policy and tariff policy of central government necessitated procurement of power from private generators,” it said.
The affidavit said the PIL made baseless allegations against TNERC chairman S Akshaykumar and member G Rajagopal. No financial impropriety had been committed by the officials. In fact, Tangedco was in loss before their appointment, it said.
On increase in tariff, the affidavit said the suo motu hike was according to the directions of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). Also, since the issue of first tariff order in 2003, there was no revision of tariff till 2010, it said, adding that the second tariff hike was minimal and insufficient to cover the mounting deficit faced by TNEB. Even the next tariff increase by 37% in 2012 was “not good enough to wipe the massive deficit”, it said. The hike of15% effected in 2014 was marginal and necessary, the affidavit said.
The affidavit said the petition should be dismissed with exemplary costs. The first bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice T S Sivagnanam directed Union power secretary, former chairman of TNEB Gnandesikan and Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) to file their replies on July 7, 2015.