MADHYA PRADESH POORV KSHETRA VIDYUT VITARAN COMPANY LIMITED AND ORS. Vs. MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Appeals have been filed by Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Limited, Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Limited, Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Limited, the Distribution Licensees and Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Limited, the trading company against the four impugned orders passed by the Madhya Pradesh Regulatory Commission ("State Commission") for the respective tariff periods. Appeal No. 234 of 2014 is filed against impugned order dated 22.07.2014 passed by the State Commission for truing up of Aggregate Revenue Requirement ("ARR") of the Appellants for the FY 2011 -12. Appeal No. 270 of 2014 is filed against impugned order dated 19.06.2014 passed by the State Commission for truing up of the Aggregate Revenue Requirement ("ARR") of the Appellants for the FY 2010 -11. Appeal No. 271 of 2014 is filed against impugned order dated 12.06.2014 passed by the State Commission for truing up of the Aggregate Revenue Requirement ("ARR") of the three Distribution Companies, the Appellants herein, for the FY 2009 -10. Appeal No. 276 of 2014 is filed against impugned order dated 06.02.2014 passed by the State Commission for truing up of the Aggregate Revenue Requirement ("ARR") of the Appellants for the FY 2008 -09.

(2.) AS the issues raised in all the four Appeals are similar, a common judgment is being rendered. We shall be taking up the issues raised by the Appellants, reply of the Respondent and our findings one by one. For brevity we shall be considering the facts of the Appeal No. 234 of 2014. The Appellants have raised the following 10 issues wherein their claims have been disallowed by the State Commission;

(3.) ACCORDING to the Appellants, the State Commission had not considered the actual quantum of supply to unmetered agricultural consumers in excess of normative hours of supply considered at the time of determination of revenue requirements in the initial tariff order on estimate basis. The normative hours of supply considered in the order determining the said initial tariff order deciding the revenue requirements was 6 hours to unmetered agricultural consumers, whereas the Appellants had in actual supply more hours of supply considering the needs of the agricultural consumers.