Chennai Metro Rail cannot be treated as special category power consumer: TNERC

The CMRL had sought that it be included under the special category consumer and provide tariff based on the actual cost of supply, excluding both the subsidy and cross subsidy elements.

Chennai Metro Rail trial running at Saidapet. File

The Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (TNERC) has rejected a plea by the Chennai Metro Rail Limited (CMRL) to include it under the special category consumer and provide tariff based on the actual cost of supply, excluding both the subsidy and cross subsidy elements.

Earlier, the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) had directed the TNERC to take a clear decision on the issue. Based on it, the CMRL had moved a remand application before the TNERC.

The Commission noted that power was supplied to the CMRL at around ₹7.03, a unit which is much lesser than the average cost of supply which prevailed during the period from 2016-17 to 2018-19 i.e., ₹7.11 a unit to ₹8.15 a unit.

“Here the petitioner (CMRL) would appreciate that the petitioner has not only availed the benefit of the rate of cost of supply but also availed this benefit to all its connected load, including commercial loads and non-traction load viz, lifts, escalators, lights, fans, air conditioners, etc,” it added.

The TNERC also pointed out that Delhi, Maharashtra and Kerala had granted only the traction load of the metro rail alone under specialised category, whereas the TNERC had ordered connecting Chennai Metro’s entire load under HT I-B category , i.e., traction and non-traction loads (with deduction of consumption recorded in other load like ATM, kiosks, stalls, hotels, etc.,).

The Chennai Metro Rail is already availing the benefit of lesser tariff than the average cost of supply of the Tangedco. It has also been permitted to connect all its loads under HT I-B unlike “Railways” which is not permitted to connect any other load under this tariff category, it noted.

Therefore, the CMRL’s claim to fix the railway traction tariff for the period of trial operation from July 2013 to June 2015 and to include it as a Special Category of consumer and provide tariff for the revenue operation based upon actual cost of supply at 110 kV excluding subsidy and cross subsidy element could not be accepted, the Commission ruled.