JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ORS. versus RAJASTHAN TEXTILE MILLS ASSOCIATION & ANR. ETC.

JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LIMITED AND ORS. versus RAJASTHAN TEXTILE MILLS ASSOCIATION & ANR. ETC.

Regulation 90 prescribes that CSS is to be computed with reference to the tariff payable by the relevant consumer category; therefore CSS need not be determined simultaneously with tariff determination and may be determined separately based on the prevailing tariff. The APTEL erred in holding that CSS and tariff determinations must always coincide; the State Commission's order dated 1 December 2016, which computed CSS based on the tariff fixed on 22 September 2016, was lawful and is restored.

Parties
Appellants: Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited and Ors.; Respondents: Rajasthan Textile Mills Association & Anr. Etc.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court (appeal Under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003)
Outcome
Appeals allowed; impugned judgment of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity set aside; State Commission order dated 1 December 2016 restored.
Legal Topics
Cross Subsidy Surcharge (css), Open Access, Tariff Determination, Cross Subsidisation, Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission
Electricity Law Regulatory Law Tariff Regulation Cross Subsidy Surcharge (css) Open Access Tariff Determination Cross Subsidisation Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited and Ors.

Appellants

Rajasthan Textile Mills Association & Anr. Etc.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal to the Supreme Court (appeal Under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Cross-Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) must be determined simultaneously with tariff determination or can be determined separately based on prevailing tariff rates under Regulation 90 of the Rajasthan Tariff Regulations, 2014
  2. 2 Whether the State Commission erred in determining CSS with effect from 1 December 2016 based on the tariff fixed by its order dated 22 September 2016
  3. 3 Whether the APTEL was correct in setting aside the State Commission's order determining CSS

Ratio Decidendi

Regulation 90 prescribes that CSS is to be computed with reference to the tariff payable by the relevant consumer category; therefore CSS need not be determined simultaneously with tariff determination and may be determined separately based on the prevailing tariff. The APTEL erred in holding that CSS and tariff determinations must always coincide; the State Commission's order dated 1 December 2016, which computed CSS based on the tariff fixed on 22 September 2016, was lawful and is restored.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; impugned judgment of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity set aside; State Commission order dated 1 December 2016 restored.

Orders

  • Impugned APTEL judgment dated 15.09.2022 set aside
  • Order dated 1 December 2016 of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission restored