Raises doubts over an impartial probe into alleged irregularities, wants Justice L Narasimha Reddy to step down from inquiry commission
Hyderabad: Leader of Opposition and former Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao on Saturday questioned the legality of the Justice L Narasimha Reddy Inquiry Commission set up by the State government to probe into alleged irregularities in the power sector, pointing out that commissions could not be constituted against orders of Electricity Regulatory Commission decisions. Calling Reddy’s approach ‘biased’ and with ‘preconceived notions’, he asked the former Chief Justice of High Court to recuse himself from heading the commission.
In a 12-page written reply to the notice served by the Commission, the BRS chief found fault with the Commission for being biased as was evident from the Commission’s statements to the press even as the probe was under progress. He also raised doubts over an impartial probe and faulted Reddy for taking charge of the commission without informing the government that such constitution of a commission was illegal.
The former Chief Minister, explaining how the power sector in Telangana at the time of State formation was in serious crisis, said the then union government had incorporated the power share in AP Reorganisation Act considering the power consumption statistics of five years prior to State bifurcation. According to the Act, Telangana was to get 53.89 per cent and Andhra Pradesh 46.11 per cent. This ratio was to be followed for the next 10 years. However, the power share allocated to Telangana was insufficient. Even considering the power allocated, there was a shortfall of nearly 2700 MW. To worsen the situation, Andhra Pradesh did not supply over 1500 MW violating the Reorganisation Act provisions, and with non-availability of 900 MW of power from gas-based stations, Telangana suffered a deficit of 2400 MW. On the whole, there was shortage of nearly 5000 MW leading to a severe crisis in Telangana.
In this backdrop, the power sector organisations and the Telangana government worked in unison to tide over the crisis and as a result, the installed capacity which stood at 7,778 MW went up 20,000 MW. Strengthening of the power distribution system led to Telangana being the only State in the country to supply quality power 24X7 to all sectors. If the per capita power consumption in Telangana stood at 1,196 units in 2014, it shot up to 2,349 units in the next 10 year period.
“These results were not obtained by perfunctory actions but charting of a careful plan to set up new power generation units, while following all laws and getting requisite permissions from State and union governments. Moreover, all these steps were initiated as per the judgements of the Electricity Regulatory Commission (ERC). If any organization or a person had any objections, they could have aired them at the ERC’s public hearings. Any decision of the ERC could be appealed against in the Electricity Appellate Tribunal also,” he pointed out.
A Revanth Reddy, then a TDP MLA, had submitted his objections to buying of power from Chhattisgarh to the ERC and the latter had given clearance after considering the objections. “The law stipulates that if Revanth Reddy had any objections, he was empowered to move the Electricity Appellate Tribunal and later the Supreme Court also. However, interestingly, Mr Revanth Reddy had not preferred to move the higher authorities with objection to the ERC decision,” he said.
Asserting that extraordinary situations required extraordinary decisions and there was severe power crisis in Telangana, Chandrashekhar Rao also dismissed the Commission’s statements on use of sub-critical technology, stating that there was no restriction or ban on use of sub-critical technology and it could be used till 2017. The Commission had made critical comments on the Bhadradri Sub-Critical thermal station without considering these facts, he said, also stating that the Commission completely ignored the fact that more than 90 per cent of power stations in the country were using sub-critical technology.
“Your pointed reference that only the Telangana government made a mistake by opting for sub-critical technology exemplifies the malevolent intentions. The fact that there were no restrictions on use of sub-critical technology till end of 12 five-year plan till 2017 was also completely ignored. Your comments appeared to be meant to vilify the then government despite the State and union governments according required permissions and the timely completion of the project. For all these reasons, I believe you lost the moral standing to head the commission of inquiry. I urge you to withdraw yourself from the commission,” Chandrashekhar Rao said.
The Commission, while criticising the pace of construction of the Bhadradri plant, had not considered the stay order issued by the National Green Tribunal and also the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic which impeded the works, he said.
On the Commission’s critical remarks on the power purchase agreement (PPA) with Chhattisgarh to sell power from Marwah power station, which was in the final stages of completion, Rao pointed out that the Commission observed as if the Marwah power plant was not in existence and made comments finding fault with decision to buy power from the power plant.
“You also ignored the expression in the MoU ‘Upcoming Marwah project’. Telangana had booked 2000 MW corridor with PGCIL and had utilized 1000 MW of power from Chhattisgarh, but since Chhattisgarh was unable to supply additional 1000 MW, Telangana cancelled the 1000 MW corridor. This had not led to any financial loss to Telangana power organisations,” he pointed out.
The Commission had commented that state ERCs could not ratify inter-state PPAs and that only the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission was only empowered to do so. However, section 64 (5) of the Electricity Act 2003 clearly enunciates that such an authority is vested with the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (ERCs) only and based on this, the ERCs ratified the PPAs.
“I believe you have crossed the limits beyond the terms of reference in apportioning unjustified blame on the government which shows your determination to discredit the erstwhile government,” he said, stating that the Congress government had ordered the commission of inquiry with a clear political motive and to discredit the earlier government.
“If the political considerations of the current ruling party are unfortunate, more painful are your unbridled comments as the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry in the press conference. I wanted to submit my reply to the commission by June 15, as per your notice, but against the conventions of a commission of inquiry, before completing the inquiry, your act of calling for a press conference, taking the name of Telangana and my name in the press conference and extending the time for submitting the reply in view of the Lok Sabha elections as a personal favour, have caused extreme pain to me,” Chandrashekhar Rao said.
“It is as if you are delivering the judgement even before conducting the inquiry and it does not behove the stature of a retired Chief Justice of High Court. An inescapable conclusion after considering all these facts is the futility of deposing anything before this commission of inquiry,” he said, reiterating his demand that Reddy recuse himself from the heading the commission.