The Madras High Court Bench here has posted for final hearing on July 23 a petition seeking a direction either to the State government or any other appropriate agency to conduct a performance audit relating to “inordinate” delay in executing six major power projects in the State.
A Division Bench comprising Justice M. Jaichandren and Justice R. Mahadevan said they would take up the case along with a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed in 2012 with a plea to order the State government to find a solution to “unprecedented” power crisis in the State.
R. Krishnamoorthy (69), a practising lawyer and a social activist based in Madurai, had filed the present plea through his counsel S. Srinivasa Raghavan along with an impleading application to include him as one of the parties in the 2012-PIL petition.
“I am impleading myself in this case since even after two years of the filing of the PIL petition, there is very little improvement in the power supply scenario and also because some very important details relating to the issue must be brought to the attention of this honourable court,” he said.
ProjectsThe projects which the petitioner wanted to be audited include the Northern Chennai Stage –II (1200 MW), Mettur Stage-III (600 MW), Vallur TPS (1500 MW), Tuticorin JV TPS (1000 MW), Neyveli TS-II Expansion (500 MW) and Kalpakkam PFBR (500 MW).
The lawyer pointed out that the Power Grid Corporation, established to develop efficient power transmission system network in the country, itself had blamed the delay in commissioning power projects as the major reason for the power crisis in the State while filing a counter affidavit to the Public Interest Litigation petition in July 2012.
Then, it was pointed out that the North Chennai project was delayed by 22 months, the Mettur project by 12 months, Vallur by 18 months, Tuticorin by 17 months, Neyveli by 26 months and Kalpakkam by 18 months. “These delays are causing substantial dent on the supply-demand scenario,” the PGD had said.
Accusing the contractors of having caused the delay, the impleading petitioner claimed that the State government had not taken any steps to hold the contractors liable for the delay and even to assess the loss caused to the State owing to the delays.
“On account of such very indulgent attitude by the State government towards its contractors, the State exchequer is losing very heavily. Each year the State government has been extending financial support running into several thousand crores to offset losses sustained by the fifth respondent,” he added.
