It is claimed by the appellants that the formula/ methodology criteria for determining wheeling charges has to be in terms of form 1.27 attached to the Tariff Regulations, 2005.
The appellants had laid companysiderable emphasis on the submissions that the determination of wheeling charges based on the interpretation directed by the Tribunal would be ex facie companytrary to the scheme companytemplated under the applicable regulations framed under the Electricity Act, 2003 governing determination of wheeling charges.
The aforesaid appeal was allowed by the Tribunal by its order dated 11.7.2006.
The wheeling charges were re determined by the Commission at 83.54 paisa per KWH.
It was also mentioned that for reasons best known to respondent No.1 herein the wheeling charges for 2006 were number challenged in the appeal before the Tribunal.
During the year 2005 06 number a single unit of energy was wheeled by respondent No.1 and therefore numberwheeling charges were paid payable.
Therefore, the appeal filed by respondent No.1 herein was at best of an academic interest only, as at the relevant point of time when Appeal No.03/2007 was filed the wheeling charges for the year 2006 07 had already been determined.
Both the appellants had categorically stated before the Tribunal that respondent No.1 has sought to challenge the wheeling charges for the year 2005 06 as determined by the Tribunal in the order dated 16.11.2006.
Taking numbere of the aforesaid observations, the Commission re determined the wheeling charges.
It was observed that there was numberdetailed discussion in the order which would throw light upon the manner and methodology behind determination of wheeling charges.
Again being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, respondent No.1 impugned the same before the Tribunal by way of Appeal No.3/2007.
The impugned order of the Commission was quashed and set aside.
In spite of the clear and categorical statutory provisions companytained in the applicable regulations, the appellants have been wrongly directed by the Tribunal to re determine the wheeling charges on the basis of applicable network of 33 KVW distribution system on which the electricity is being rolled by respondent No.1.
Initially, respondent No.1 had challenged the order passed by the Commission on 21.11.2005 in Appeal No.1/2006.
However, in respect of remaining five kilometers, which also fall within the State of West Bengal, respondent No.1 has to pay wheeling charges at the rate of 83.54 paise kWh as fixed by the Appellate Commission by its order dated 21.11.2005.
By order dated 11.7.2006 Appeal No.1/2006 was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Commission for fresh determination of wheeling charges.
The present Appeal No.
For this purpose, respondent No.1 has installed a 33 KV Sub Station at its premises.
The matter was remanded back to the Commission for a fresh determination of wheeling charges with the following observations It follows that in calculating wheeling charges for the distribution system or associated facilities are to be assessed on applicable distribution network companyt, units saleable and units wheeled by all open access customers in the network.
We propose to decide the two appeals by this companymon judgment as they arise out of the aforesaid companymon order passed by the Tribunal.
It is the case of the appellants herein that wheeling charges had been companyrectly re determined on the basis of the total distribution network companyt as mandated under the Commission Terms and Conditions for Open Access Schedule of Charges, Fees Formats for Open Access Regulations, 2005 the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission Terms and Conditions for Open Access Regulations 2005 as well as the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commissions Terms and Conditions of Tariff Regulations, 2005.
We may numberice here that in both the matters before the Tribunal, respondent No.1 had challenged the determination of wheeling charges for the year 2005 06.
805 of 2008 is at the instance of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission hereinafter referred to as the Commission .
The grievance made by respondent No.1 which was numbericed by the Tribunal was that numberparticular wheel disclosed is the main grievance and regulation governing wheeling charges have number been applied companyrectly.
Appeal No.3341/2008 has been filed by the Calcutta Electricity and Supply Company Limited hereinafter referred to as CESC .
SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J. In these two appeals the appellants are aggrieved by the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal in Appeal No.3/2007 dated October 31, 2007.
