Judgement reserved in power crisis case in Madurai

PILs had sought performance audit for delay in commissioning many power projects in Tamil Nadu.

The Madras High Court Bench here on Wednesday reserved its judgement on two public interest litigation petitions seeking a direction to the Central and State governments to ensure uninterrupted power supply after conducting a performance audit to find out reasons for delay in commissioning several power projects in Tamil Nadu.

A Division Bench of Justices M. Jaichandren and R. Mahadevan deferred its verdict without mentioning a date. Earlier, W. Peter Ramesh Kumar, counsel for one of the petitioners, contended that the power situation in the State had not improved much ever since he filed the case in 2012. He said the State would plunge into darkness if the situation persists for long.

S. Srinivasa Raghavan, counsel for an impleading petitioner, said that the Power Grid Corporation, under the control of the Centre as well as Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (Tangedco), had blamed delay in commissioning new power projects as the reason for the power crisis. Yet, Tangedco was not willing to conduct a performance audit, he claimed.

On the other hand, Tangedco counsel S. Srimathi contended that Accountant General’s office had already conducted audit of three State owned projects — North Chennai Thermal Power Station Stage II Unit-I, NCTPS Stage II Unit-II and Mettur Thermal Power Station Stage III — for the year ending March 31, 2013, but the final recommendations of the audit were yet to be received.

She said five other projects — Vallur Thermal Power Project, Neyveli Thermal Station II expansion, Tuticorin Joint Venture Thermal Power Station, Kalpakkam PFBR and Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project — were being implemented by the Central government agencies and monitored by the Tangedco. The counsel assured the court that necessary action would be initiated against the contractors for the delay.

According to her, the contractors were liable to pay liquidated damages for the delay since time was the essence of the contracts. She claimed that Tangedco had not hesitated to collect damages even from Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL), a public sector enterprise, for not completing one of the power projects on time.