| Work Detail |
In a recent development, two separate cases were brought forth by Open Access Consumers and Solar Generators against Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL). These cases were filed to address grievances stemming from MSEDCL’s actions concerning the imposition of wheeling charges and losses on electricity transactions under open-access frameworks.
The crux of the matter revolves around compliance with a directive issued by the Regulatory Commission on December 27, 2023. This directive explicitly prohibited MSEDCL from levying such charges and required them to refund any amounts collected in this regard within a stipulated time frame. Despite this directive, subsequent bills issued to the petitioners continued to include these charges, prompting further legal action.
One of the petitioners, Jubilant, operating as an open-access consumer, sourced electricity from a solar generator, AMP Energy, under a captive generation arrangement. Despite the regulatory directive, MSEDCL issued invoices in January and February 2024 that included wheeling charges, contrary to the Commission’s order. This non-compliance led to additional financial burdens on Jubilant, who was compelled to make payments under protest to avoid disconnection of services.
In response to the repeated violations of its directives, the Regulatory Commission convened hearings on March 12, 2024. During these proceedings, the Commission noted MSEDCL’s failure to comply with its orders, including a specific directive to submit a compliance report within a set timeframe. MSEDCL neither contested the claims of non-compliance nor provided any indication of progress toward rectifying the situation.
Expressing dissatisfaction with MSEDCL’s persistent disregard for its orders, the Commission expressed its intention to pursue punitive action under applicable legal provisions. Specifically, MSEDCL was given 21 days to justify why penalties should not be imposed under Section 142 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
The Commission’s decision followed a series of legal actions initiated by the petitioners to seek redress. These actions included filing petitions and interlocutory applications (IAs) to expedite the resolution of their grievances and to seek interim relief from the imposition of future wheeling charges until a final decision was reached.
Overall, the cases highlight ongoing challenges within the regulatory framework governing electricity distribution and consumer rights. They underscore the importance of regulatory compliance and adherence to directives issued by regulatory bodies to ensure fair practices and protection of consumer interests in the energy sector. As the proceedings continue, stakeholders await further developments to see how the Regulatory Commission addresses MSEDCL’s alleged violations and ensures compliance with its directives moving forward. |
