Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed appeals challenging the dismissal of petitions by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) regarding the captive generation plant established by M/s Shri Bajrang Power and Ispat Ltd. (SBPIL) for the benefit of its sister concern, M/s Shri Bajrang Metallics and Power Ltd. (SBMPL). SBPIL sought permission from the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Regulatory Commission to wheel power to SBMPL, asserting that more than 51% of the generated electricity would be consumed by them. The Commission initially rejected the appellant's contention that the consumption was disproportionate to ownership. The Commission ruled in favor of SBPIL, stating that the arrangement qualified as 'own consumption' under the Electricity Act, 2003. The appellant contested this decision, arguing that unless SBPIL consumed 51% of the generated electricity, it could not benefit under Section 9 of the Act. The court examined the definitions and provisions of the Act, particularly focusing on the requirements for a captive generating plant. It concluded that both SBPIL and SBMPL met the necessary criteria for ownership and consumption. The court emphasized the liberal provisions of the Act aimed at promoting captive generation and dismissed the appeals, affirming the Commission's order and APTEL's judgment. The decision underscored the importance of facilitating captive generation to support small and medium industries and enhance employment opportunities.
Headnote
A) Electricity Law - Captive Generating Plant - Definition and Requirements - Electricity Act, 2003, Sections 2(8), 9 - The court held that a captive generating plant must primarily serve its owners, and the consumption of electricity must meet specified thresholds. The court found that both SBPIL and SBMPL satisfied the ownership and consumption criteria, thus allowing the appeal (Paras 20-24).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the open access for transmitting electricity from SBPIL to SBMPL qualifies as own use under the Electricity Act, 2003.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the regulatory commission's order and the APTEL's judgment, stating that both SBPIL and SBMPL met the necessary criteria for captive generation.
Law Points
- Electricity Act
- 2003
- captive generating plant
- open access
- own consumption
- regulatory commission
- interpretation of statutes
