Summary
Punjab induction-furnace consumers could not rely on a pre-2003 exemption to avoid surcharge under subsequent statutory tariff orders. The Regulatory Commission had not continued that concession. The reduced surcharge rates, including a deterrent element for continued lower-voltage supply, were upheld within the limited judicial review of expert tariff determinations.
Issues
- Whether the 1999 surcharge exemption survived subsequent statutory tariff orders.
- Whether the revised surcharge rates were unlawful or arbitrary.
Provisions considered
- Sections 61, 62 and 86, Electricity Act, 2003Tariff determination is a statutory function of the Commission; earlier concessions did not override its subsequent tariff orders. (¶¶ 5–7, 20–23)
Held
- The earlier compromise exempting pre-1995 units ceased to govern absent express recognition in subsequent tariff orders. Consistent orders justified surcharge for losses and costs of supplying high-demand units at 11 KV. (¶ 20)
- Judicial interference with expert tariff fixation is limited to illegality, arbitrariness or action beyond the statute. Adding a deterrent element to conversion costs to discourage continued 11 KV supply did not invalidate the revised rates. (¶ 22–23)
Result
Both sets of appeals dismissed; the High Court and Appellate Tribunal orders affirmed, with parties bearing their own costs.