BHASKAR SHRACHI ALLOYS LTD. ETC.ETC. versus DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2018] 10 S.C.R. 773 · Decided: 23-07-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANJAN GOGOI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 9 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
773
BHASKAR SHRACHI ALLOYS LTD. ETC.ETC.
v.
DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 971-973 of 2008)
JULY 23, 2018
[RANJAN GOGOI AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.]
Electricity – Supply/distribution of electricity generated by
Damodar Valley Corporation –  Determination of tariff for –
Interplay between the provisions of 1948 Act and the 2003 Act –
Corporation notified its own tariff order in 2000 – 2003 Act came
into force – Despite coming into force of the 2003 Act, the
Corporation did not approach the Central Electricity Regulatory
Commission (CERC) for determination of the tariff chargeable by it
– CERC issued tariff order – Challenged by Corporation before
Appellate Tribunal – Tribunal inter alia held that provisions of the
1948 Act which are not inconsistent with the 2003 Act will continue
to hold the field so far as the determination of tariff is concerned –
Propriety of – Held: Part IV of the 1948 Act not being inconsistent
with the provisions of the 2003 Act can be taken into account for
determination of tariff – Such provisions of the 1948 Act will also
have an overriding effect over the inconsistent provisions of the
2004 Tariff Regulations – View taken by the Tribunal affirmed –
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions
of Tariff) Regulations, 2004 – Damodar Valley Corporation Act,
1948 – Electricity Act, 2003 – ss.61, 62 and 125.
Electricity Act, 2003 – Fourth proviso to s.14 – Purport and
effect of – Plea of appellants that the application of a proviso must
always be confined and understood within the parameters of  the
provisions of the main section of which it is a part – Held: Fourth
proviso to s.14 is clearly a substantive provision to lay down
something more than what a proviso generally deals with – It need
not be understood to be confined only to the question of licensing
which is dealt with by the main part of s.14 – Damodar Valley
Corporation Act, 1948 – ss.18 and 19.
Electricity – CERC issued tariff order determining the tariff
for generation and transmission for the period from 1st April, 2006
773
[2018] 10 S.C.R. 773
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
774
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
to 31st March, 2009 by allowing a two-year transition period to the
Damodar Valley Corporation i.e. from 1st April, 2004 to 31st March,
2006 – Upheld by the Appellate Tribunal – Propriety of – Held:
Corporation in addition to generation, transmission and distribution
of electricity is statutorily required to undertake certain social
security/beneficial measures like flood control, control of soil erosion,
afforestation, navigation, promotion of public health etc. – Grant
of transitory period can not be faulted with – Said part of the order
of the Tribunal not interfered with.
Electricity Act, 2003 –s.79 – Held: Having regard to the
provisions of s.79 it is the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
(CERC) which would be the “Appropriate Commission” for
determination of tariff inasmuch as the Damodar Valley Corporation
is a Corporation owned and controlled by the Central Government
– Said conclusion recorded by the Appellate Tribunal not interfered
with.
Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 – Incorporation of
Damodar Valley Corporation under – Objects and reasons for –
Discussed.
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and
Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004 – If have overriding effect
over the parallel provisions in the 1948 Act – Plea of appellant that
2004 Regulations must override the provisions of the 1948 Act as
the said regulations are statutory in character – Held: Not accepted –
2004 Regulations though statutory in character are a species of
subordinate delegated legislation – Damodar Valley Corporation
Act, 1948.
Interpretation of Statutes – External aids – Reports submitted
by Parliamentary Standing Committee – Discussed.
Electricity – ‘Depreciation rate’ and ‘sinking fund’ – Heads
of tariff fixation – Determination of u/s.40 of the 1948 Act –
Propriety of – Discussed – Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948 –
s.40 – Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and
Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004 – Regulation 20.
Electricity – Tariff – Recovery towards Pension and Gratuity
Fund – In reversal of the decision of the Central Electricity
Regulatory Commission permitting recovery from consumers to the
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
775
extent of 60% and contribution of the balance 40% by the Damodar
Valley Corporation, Appellate Tribunal allowed entire fund to be

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.