Staff Reporter
Guwahati: The All Assam Electricity Consumers’ Association (AAECA) participated in the public hearing organised by the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission (AERC) on the tariff petition filed by APDCL for the financial year 2024–25. A three-member delegation headed by Bimal Das, advisor of the AAECA, said before the Commission that the association has already submitted a written objection against the APDCL’s proposal in response to the public notice published for the purpose.
“The FPPPA is a different product altogether, which is guided by different rules based on variable components meant for a limited period and purpose. We urge the Hon’ble Commission to determine the tariff under the provisions of Section 61 of the Electricity Act 2003 in its letter and spirit. The fixation of FPPPA as and when occasion arises should be considered within the ambit of the existing rules in force,” mentioned the objection statement.
Bimal Das also said that the Electricity Act 2003, while empowering the Regulatory Commission under Section 61, stated that the factors that would encourage competition, efficiency, economical use of resources, good performance, and optimum investments, as well as safeguarding consumers’ interests and the recovery of the cost of electricity in a reasonable manner, shall be guiding factors for the determination of tariff.
In the last tariff order dated May 29, 2023, the Commission issued directives on: i) power purchase; ii) FPPPA; iii) constitution of CGRFs; iv) submission of timely resorts, etc.; and on some other issues. The Commission rightly observed in its order dated March 29, 2023, that the power purchase cost is a major component of the total cost of APDCL and urged the Commission to scrutinise properly, with tools and expertise under its command, the power purchase cost of APDCL before accepting or passing on the unjustified burden to consumers for omissions and commissions of APDCL.
He added that as law-abiding gullible consumers feel disturbed when it comes into the public domain, some of the self-inflicted decisions of APDCL cause loss to the organisation, which not only affects general consumers but also affects the morale of dedicated employees of the organisation itself. One such glaring example is CP Case No. 20/2021 of the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum (state level). A fleet of APDCL officers detected malpractice in a high-value consumer on physical verification. But the same was overturned by officers sitting in Bijulee Bhawan, constituting a self-styled committee without authority. But instead of initiating action against erring officials, the APDCL authority approached the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court against the order of the state-level CGRF. This has not only afforded pecuniary gain to that high-value consumer but also demoralised the honest officers of APDCL. In the peak season, some unscrupulous factories managed to draw power without a metre on the plea of damage or burning of CTPT. This racket is so well organised that, on the grounds of the non-availability of CTPT, unmetered power supply continues to such premises.
“In the light of the facts mentioned, any indulgence in the form of an increase in tariff in favour of APDCL will be against the interests of gullible consumers, and it is our humble submission to do justice to the electricity consumers of the state,” mentioned AAECA.
Also Read: AERC holds public hearing on power tariff hike in Guwahati
Also Watch: