BHUBANESWAR: The Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC) has served notices to the Grid Corporation of Odisha Limited (Gridco), OPTCL, the State government, four distribution companies owned by Tata Power and others to file affidavits in response to petitions challenging its tariff orders for 2021-22.
Contesting the bulk supply, retail supply and transmission tariff orders of OERC for the current financial year effective April 1, 2021, petitioner Ananda Kumar Mohapatra, a consumer activist-cum-power analyst, had pointed out several gross irregularities committed by the commission during determination of tariff.
Terming the tariff order as arbitrary and unlawful, the petitioner said determination of bulk supply price (BSP) for Gridco at 296.29 paise per unit violates OERC regulations.
“Approval of excess central transmission charges of Rs 333 crore in the BSP order, non-consideration of revenue to the tune of `446 crore earned from sale of infirm power injected by captive power plants into State grid and violation of merit of dispatch order (MoD) principle of national tariff policy with respect to procurement economically viable State quota from independent power producers (IPPs) considerably increased the BSP having a cascading effect on the retail supply tariff,” Mohapatra said.
While accepting to the fact that injection of inadvertent power to the State grid attracts penalty as per the demand side management regulations, the petitioner argued since such power is treated as free power and Gridco has admitted that no-cost infirm power is consumed in the State, the Commission should have taken the revenue earned from this no-cost power after deducting the penalty while determining the tariff.
Calculating the average annual infirm power at 1,550.22 million units, the petitioner said an amount of Rs 446 crore at the rate of 287.70 paise per unit is earned by Gridco from the no-cost infirm power.
He urged the Commission to take into account the amount under miscellaneous receipts head while deciding on the review petitions. Claiming that the four distribution companies (discoms) - TPCODL, TPWODL, TPSODL and NESCO - are prime beneficiaries of the BSP, the petitioner said the discoms were not the respondents in the traiff proceedings.
“This establishes the fact that the impugned BSP order has been passed by OERC ex-party despite knowing the fact that more than 70 per cent of the approved cost of the ARR of the discoms constitutes power purchase cost payable to Gridco on the basis of the determined BSP,” the petition said. The Commission has fixed June 29 as the next date of hearing of the case.