Online meeting / meeting on 02 March by Power Minister GoI with State Regulators, Mar 1, 2021

Posted On : March 06, 2021

It is learnt that Minister of Power GoI has scheduled a Virtual Meeting / Meeting with State Regulators  on 02 March at 2-30 PM . However, the notice for the meeting has been kept extremely short ie 2-3  days  or so . This indicates a haphazard, unplanned and adhoc approach on matters that need to be dealt with systematically in a planned manner. On 05 Feb the draft Amendment Bill 2021 was circulated by the power ministry  only to State Discoms  and not  to State Electricity Regulators.  On 18th AIPEF had filed its provisional objections, wherein one of the objections was that of a non transparent approach. Neither SERCs nor consumers were informed about the draft amendments and were not given a chance to give their comments. It appears that only as late as 26th Feb the SERCs were asked to give their response to some points raised by the power ministry. We in AIPEF are not aware of the issues raised by the Power ministry.  It is on such occasions  one realizes that  non transparency is indeed a huge curse, more so when non transparency is created by the Ministry deliberately.

2. In any democracy, the public i.e. consumers are the biggest stakeholders  and in this case the stakeholders are being kept in the dark . We are not aware of the points on which the MoP wants response  from CERC or SERCs , but we are aware that under Sec 79(3) and Sec 86(3)  the Regulator is bound by law to ensure transparency. So whether MoP seeks response on matters under CERC or under SERCs  the Regulators have to comply with the requirement of transparency  which is possible only if the ultimate stakeholders i.e. consumers are  duly consulted. Whether the tariff is of the Central or of Stayte sector, ultimately the common  consumer has to pay  and so the requirement of transparency  necessarily  has to involve consumers. The Power Ministry is making a huge mistake by proposing amendments  which impact the consumers  while  keeping the consumers deliberately in the dark. An autocratic and non transparent approach directly conflicts with sec 79(3) and Sec 86(3) of E Act 2003.

         Particularly when the earlier amendment Bill ie Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020 was put in public domain on 17-04-2020  , there is no basis for changing to an autocratic approach and  keeping the amendments out of public domain.

 3. If indeed the Power ministry intends to obtain feedback from Regulators  then two steps are essential…

 

First that the MoP circulate the draft amendments ( along with Statement of objects and reasons) to the concerned Regulators

Second that  in the interaction  between Govt and Regulators the provisions of Sec 166  of E Act must be followed.

        Under Sec 86(2)   it is the jurisdiction of SERC to advise State Govt on

(i) promotion of competition, efficiency and economy in activities of the electricity industry;

4. So if the agenda of power ministry relates to introducing competition and consumer choice  , the Act specifies that this matter is not in the Jurisdiction of Centre ( union Govt) but of State govt.

   The proposal for Video Conference / Meeting on 02  March  between Minister and SERC/CERC  representatives , clearly excludes public response and excluding Consumers  whereas the Sec 94(3)  specifies

(3) The Appropriate Commission may authorise any person, as it deems fit, to represent the interest of the consumers in the proceedings before it.

          The intent of Act is clear that in any matter directly or indirectly impacting tariff the interest of consumers has to be protected whereas GoI is going in opposite direction by not putting  Bill 2021 in public domain. By excluding consumers and adopting autocratic approach MoPower is going against yet another provision of E Act 2003.

5. The well known consumer group and representative PRAYAS  has adopted three principles “TAP”  i.e. Transparency, Accountability and Participation. In MoP procedure there is no transparency and no participation by consumers.The policy makers are not accountable either. Clear cut provisions of E Act 2003 are being overlooked by the Govt itself.

 6. It cannot be said that the lapses were not pointed out well in time. We repeat that the two major flaws  in E Amendment Bill 2020 have still not been cured :  First that there is no statement of Objects and Reasons   Second That the major stakeholders- electricity consumers have been excluded from giving comments  by not putting the bill in public domain. The Bill is a clear attempt to introduce privatization through the backdoor  ie claim of competition, while the consumers who will take the hit of privatization have been excluded from giving comments/objections.

Thank you with regards.

 

Sincerely Yours

 

Shailendra Dubey

Chairman