Disposed

Appeal No. 188 of 2012 of M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

APTEL17 May 2013Appeal No. 188 of 2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity reserved judgment on the appeal against a provisional tariff order, directing the State Commission to consider the appeal's contentions and pass a final tariff order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent State Commission to hear parties and pass a final tariff order within three months of admission of the petition.

Appeal No. 188 of 2012 of M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd. Versus Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors. — APTEL (2013) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (Appellate Jurisdiction)

¶2

Appeal No. 188 of 2012

¶3

Dated : 17th May, 2013

¶4

Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson Hon’ble Mr. V.J. Talwar, Technical Member

¶5

M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd. ……. Appellant(s)

¶6

Versus Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors. ……. Respondent(s)

¶7

Counsel for the Appellant(s): Mr. G. Umapathy Ms. R. Mekhala

¶8

Counsel for the Respondent(s):

¶9

Mr. C.K. Rai for MPERC Mr. Sanjay Sen, Sr. Adv. & Mr. Anurag Sharma R-2

¶10

ORDER

¶11

We have heard Mr. G. Umapathy, Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, Mr. Sanjay Sen, Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent and Mr. C.K. Rai, Learned Counsel for the State Commission.

¶12

There is no dispute in the fact that the impugned order is a provisional order which was passed on 24^th July, 2012. Now, it is pointed out that the proceedings is to be initiated for passing of the final tariff order and we are told that the petition alongwith audited report would be filed by the end of June, 2013.

Contd….2..

(2)

Though we find force in the contentions urged by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as the Respondents, we do not like to go into the merits of the matter since, we deem it appropriate to direct the State Commission to pass a final tariff order after allowing the Appellant to raise all the contentions raised in this Appeal as well as the Reply filed by the Respondents.

¶17

We also think it proper to direct the State Commission to dispose of the matter by passing a final tariff order in the proceedings after hearing the parties concerned within a period of three months from the date of the admission of the petition.

¶18

Accordingly, the State Commission is directed to hear the parties and pass the final tariff order in accordance with law uninfluenced by any of findings in the impugned provisional tariff order passed by the Chairman as well as Member of the Commission.

¶19

With these observations the Appeal is disposed of.

¶20

(V.J. Talwar) (Justice M. Karpaga Vinayagam) Technical Member Chairperson

¶21

rkt/vt

¶22

Appeal No. 188 of 2012 of M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Appeal No. 188 of 2012 of M.P. Power Management Co. Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Appeal No. 84 of 2012 of Reliance Infrastructure Limited Versus The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No. 83 of 2012 of Reliance Infrastructure Limited Versus The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No. 115 of 2012 of Bihar State Electricity Board Versus Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No. 118 of 2012 of Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Versus Central Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No. 94 of 2013 of Vrl Logistics Ltd. Versus Hubli Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Appeal No.88 of 2012 of Tata Teleservices Limited Versus Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No. 85 of 2012 of Reliance Infrastructure Limited Versus The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory & Ors.

Appeal No. 101 of 2013 & I.A. No. 169 of 2013 Appeal No. 102 of 2013 & I.A. No. 170 of 2013 of Gvk Gautami Power Limited Versus Central Power Distribution Company of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. & Ors.

Review Petition No. 2 of 2013 in Appeal No. 137 of 2011 of M/s Jsw Energy Ltd. Versus Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal no. 23 of 2013 of Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Versus Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Ia no. 57 of 2013 in Dfr no. 277 of 2013 of Tamil Nadu Power Producers Association Versus Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

I.A. No. 46 of 2013 in (R.P) Dfr No.165 of 2013 in Appeal No.24 of 2011 ---------------------- Appeal No. 24 of 2011 of Odisha Power Transmission CorporationLtd. Versus Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

I.A. No. 46 of 2013 in (R.P) Dfr No.165 of 2013 in Appeal No.24 of 2011 ---------------------- Appeal No. 24 of 2011 of Odisha Power Transmission CorporationLtd. Versus Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.

Appeal No.155 of 2012 of M/s. Sal Limited. Versus Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.