Move to levy power surcharge flayed

“Loss, incurred owing to mismanagement, passed on to consumers”

March 15, 2014 02:06 pm | Updated May 19, 2016 08:54 am IST - PUDUCHERRY:

S.K. Chaturvedi, Chairman of the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission,speaking at a public hearing in Puducherry on Friday. Photo: S.S. Kumar

S.K. Chaturvedi, Chairman of the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission,speaking at a public hearing in Puducherry on Friday. Photo: S.S. Kumar

Electricity consumers registered their opposition to the 10 per cent surcharge proposed by the Puducherry Electricity Department (PED) for the year 2014-15, with the Joint Electricity Regulatory Authority that held a public hearing here on Friday.

As per a proposal submitted by the PED, there would not be any change in the existing tariff, which was approved for the year 2013-14. However, 10 per cent surcharge would be levied on tariff as approved by the Commission in the tariff order for 2013-14. The 10 per cent surcharge is part of a plan to amortise regulatory assets of Rs.320.56 crore in three years from 2013-14 to 2015-16.

Most of the consumers were unanimous in their demand to drop the surcharge . They said that the middle class and poor consumers were finding it extremely difficult to pay the existing tariff as it was high. The proposed surcharge would increase their burden. Hence, the JERC should remove surcharge component totally. Similarly, it should take steps to reduce the tariff too.

Complaining that the Puducherry Electricity Department (PED) had been facing a severe management crisis, consumers said that the loss incurred owing to mismanagement and corrupt practices had been passed on to consumers. The projected transmission and distribution losses and aggregate technical and commercial losses stood at 12.5 per cent and 16.88 per cent respectively. These were more than the average level. When a few consumers opposed the JERC for conducting a public hearing while the model code of conduct was in force, Commission chairman S.K. Chaturvedi said that the hearing was meant only to listen to the views and grievances of consumers. It would not pass any order during election period.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.