Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 3109 of 2006
PETITIONER:
M/s DLF Power Ltd
RESPONDENT:
Central Coalfields Ltd. and Anr
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/07/2007
BENCH:
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
(With Civil Appeal No.3561of 2006)
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
1. Challenge in these appeals is to the order dated 11th May,
2006, passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (in short
’Appellate Tribunal’). The appeal was filed by the respondent
No.1 to set aside the order dated 4th December, 2004 as
amended by order dated 28.2.2005 passed by the Jharkhand
State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Ranchi (in short the
’State Commission’).
2. While disposing of the appeal, the Appellate Tribunal
held as follows:
"In the result-
(i) On the first point, we hold that the
Regulatory Commission has neither the
authority nor jurisdiction in terms of The
Electricity Act 2003 to fix a tariff between the
appellant, a consumer and the second
Respondent a generator being a commercial
transaction pure and simple, which
relationship is governed by an existing PPA.
We also hold that it is not an order or a tariff
determination/order by the Regulatory
Commission falling under one or more the
provisions of The Electricity Act 2003, which
alone is appellable.
(ii) On the second point, we hold that the
Regulatory Commission as an expert Arbitral
Tribunal has resolved the dispute as referred
to it by parties to the dispute on invitation
and it is an award in terms of the PPA
entered between the parties and it is
enforceable as it has all the force of an
arbitral award passed by a validly constituted
Arbitral Tribunal.
(iii) On the third point, we hold that no
appeal is maintainable before the Appellate
Tribunal for Electricity and appeal deserves
to be rejected as not maintainable, as it is not
in dispute that in law as against the award of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
an Arbitral Tribunal no appeal is
maintainable before this Appellate Tribunal.
(iv) On the last point, we hold that the
resolution of dispute by the State Regulatory
Commission is by way of arbitral proceedings
and it is an award which is binding on the
parties. We have neither the jurisdiction nor
authority to interfere with the impugned
resolution of tariff by way of arbitration; and
(v) In the result, all the points are answered
against the appellant and the appellant is not
entitled to any relief in this appeal."
3. The appeal was dismissed as incompetent and not
maintainable.
4. During the course of hearing of the appeal it appeared to
us that there is need for verification of the capitalization of the
costs incurred upto commissioning of appellants’ power plants
at Rajrappa and Gidi. For this purpose the reputed Cost
Accountants have to do the verification and for this purpose
we have required the parties to suggest the names. While the
appellants have suggested names of three Chartered
Accountants, respondents have suggested that it will be done
by Cost Accountants Unit of Neyvely Lignite Corporation Ltd.,
a public sector undertaking.
5. We have considered the names suggested. We direct that
let the Cost Accounts Wing of M/s Ernst & Young, Chartered
Accountants determine the actual capital costs based on the
formula for the power purchase agreement between Coal India
Ltd. and M/s DLF Power Company Ltd. for the aforesaid two
plants. Copies of the report of the Cost Accounts Wing shall be
given to the parties and also submitted to the State
Commission. On receipt of the report, the Commission shall
determine the tariff as per the terms of the power purchase
agreement between the parties for the two power plants.
Needless to say that for the purpose of verification, necessary
datas and information shall be made available to the Cost
Accounts Wing as may be required. Within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of the report from the Cost
Accounts Wing the State Commission shall determine the
tariffs. Copies of the tariff order shall be issued to the parties
and shall also be submitted before this Court. In case M/s
Ernst & Young Chartered Accountants express any difficulty,
within a period of three weeks, the Cost Accounts Wing of
Neyvely Lignite Corporation Ltd., shall undertake the
assignment as directed above
6. Call these matters in February, 2008.