POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF UTTARAKHAND LIMITED Vs. UTTARAKHAND ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Review Petition has been filed by Power Transmission Corporation of Uttrakhand Limited ("PTCUL") in Appeal No. 163 of 2013 seeking review of the judgment dated 29.11.2014 passed by this Tribunal in Appeal No. 163 of 2013 filed by the Review Petitioner/Appellant together with Appeal No. 128 of 2013 and Appeal No. 129 of 2013 both titled Bhilangana Hydro Power Limited Vs. PTCUL and others to the extent of issues related to disallowance of Return on Equity and the issue of declaration of 220 kV D/C Bhilangana - Ghansali line as an intra -State line.

(2.) According to the Review Petitioner the Tribunal has not given any finding regarding declaration of 220 kV Bhilangana - Ghansali line as intra -State line and the State Commission's jurisdiction to determine the transmission charges for this line, and also on the issue of disallowance of Return on Equity ("ROE") on the funds deployed from the Power Development fund ("PDF") by the State Government which were raised in the Appeal No. 163 of 2013.

(3.) SHRI Sanjay Sen, Learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No. 2 has submitted that Respondent No. 2 had filed an Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Civil Appeal No. 2368 -2370 of 2015 challenging the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. The issue regarding the jurisdiction of the State Commission has been raised by the Respondent No. 2 in the Appeal filed before Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 09.03.2015 has admitted the Appeal. Therefore review against the impugned judgment of this Tribunal on the issue of jurisdiction is not maintainable. However, the Review on the issue of ROE which has not been raised in the Appeal is maintainable. On the issue of ROE it is submitted by Shri Sanjay Sen that the State Commission has been disallowing any ROE on funds deployed by the State Government out of PDF since 2008. He also referred to the order dated 29.04. 2013 wherein the Petitioner (PTCUL) was directed to bring up evidence that PDF in past has been funded through contribution from the State Government under Section 5 of the PDF Act in addition to be funded by the Cess on Hydro Generation.