Hyderabad, October 16: The AP Electricity Regulatory Commission conducted a public hearing here today on the government allowing independent power producers (IPPs) to sell 20 percent of their production in the open market.
While the counsel for IPPs argued that the government’s order was binding on the Regulatory Commission and it had to give its consent.
ERC chairman Raghottama Rao, member R Radha Kishan and CR Sekhar Reddy heard them and postponed the hearing to November 11.
Presenting the case on behalf of the Discoms, their counsel P Siva Rao said that the government, by its order No 135, had clarified certain issues pertaining to the sale of power and wanted the APERC to take an appropriate decision.
However, speaking on behalf of citizens, journalist M Venugopala Rao argued that the wording in the direction given by the government was derogatory to the authority of the ERC and said the government had to give in writing such directions to it directly and should not mark the copy to anyone.
Though under Section 108 of Electricity Act of 2003, the government could issue such directions in the interest of the public, the word ‘public interest’ was not mentioned, he pointed out. Venugopala Rao said that the statement of the government that it had held discussions with all stakeholders was not true. Meetings were held with officials and representatives of the IPPs but people were ignored, he said.
He said that the Chief Minister was kept in the dark but he had to own responsibility for the errors in the GO.
Energy expert K Raghu said that the Attorney-General of India gave a clarification with regard to the scope and limitations of Section 108 and clearly stated that the directions issued under the section were not binding.
The directions did not have such a force to which APERC had to abide by, he said.
While IPPs counsel MG Ramachandran said that the direction given under Section 108 was binding on the APERC and the GO could not be challenged in the APERC court.
Citing several judgments, he said that the APERC was a statutory body and had limited scope.
Telangana Rashtra Samiti former MP G Vinod and its floor leader in the Assembly E Rajendar wanted the ERC to reject the government’s decision.
–Agencies–