IMPORTANT POINTS
Regulation 116 of the Safety Regulations is not ultra-vires the 2003 Act, that it is not manifestly arbitrary and that it cannot be said to be a provision that defeats the objects and purpose of the enactment.
The Rule making power of the Central Electricity Authority is to make Regulations consistent with the provisions of the 2003 Act, it would, without doubt, be subject to the provisions of Section 131 and 133 of the 2003 Act and the scheme framed there under.
The Scheme framed under Sections 131/133 it is not necessary to examine the contention as to whether the settlement which is binding in terms of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, will override the statutory Regulations.

JUDGMENT :

1. The Electricity Act of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2003 Act’) came into force on 10-06-2003. This Act repealed (i) the Indian Electricity Act, 1910; (ii) the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and (iii) the Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998. The preamble of the Electricity Act, 2003 reads as follows:

“An Act to consolidate the laws relating to generation, transmission, distribution, trading and use of electricity and generally for taking measures conducive to development of electricity industry, promoting competition therein, protecting interest of consumers and supply of electricity to all areas, rationalization of electricity tariff, ensuring transparent policies regarding subsidies, promotion of efficient and environmentally benign policies, constitution of Central Electricity Authority, Regulatory Commissions and establishment of Appellate Tribunal and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

2. The Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter also referred to as ‘the Board’) was constituted in terms of the provisions contained in the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. Part XIII of the 2003 Act deals with reorganization of Boards constituted in terms of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The provisions of Part XIII of the 2003 Act provide for vesting of the properties of the Board including all rights, liabilities etc., in the concerned State Government and re-vesting of the same by the State Government in a Government Company or Companies. Provisions have also been made regarding the officers and employees of the Board and their continuance in the new entity which, as stated above was to be a Government company. As far as the State of Kerala is concerned, the re-vesting in a Government company took place on 31-10-2013. The Government Company was registered on 14-01-2011 as the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd. (hereinafter also referred to as ‘KSEBL’) under the Companies Act, 1956.

3. In these writ appeals and the connected writ petition we are essentially concerned with the validity or otherwise of an order issued by the Government of Kerala bearing No. G.O. (P) No. 1/2019/ED Dated 13-02-2019 issued in exercise of power relatable to Regulation 116 of the Central Electricity Authority (Measures relating to Safety and Electric Supply) Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter also referred to as the ‘Safety Regulations) and also with the question as to whether Regulation 116 of the Safety Regulations itself, was ultra-vires the rule making power of the Central Electricity Authority (the author of the Safety Regulations). Through the order dated 13-02-2019 the Government of Kerala granted an exemption to employees of the KSEBL from the qualifications prescribed in Regulations 6 and 7 of the Safety Regulations. This action of the Government of Kerala and Regulation 116 of the Safety Regulations were therefore challenged before this Court. The learned Single Judge has accepted the case put forth and granted the declaration sought. It was inter-alia held that the Central Electricity Authority had no power to issue any Regulation in the nature of Regulation 116 and that the order dated 13-02-2019 granting the exemption, as above, was bad in law. The appellants before us challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge while the writ petition which has been tagged along with these appeals is filed seeking reliefs similar to those granted by the learned Single Judge.

4. W.A. No. 223/2020 arising out of W.P. (C) No. 6410/2019 has been filed by the KSEBL and one of its officers. This writ appeal is taken as the lead case and the exhibits etc referred to in this judgment refer to exhibits produced in W.P. (C) No. 6410/2019. Since the issues arising for consideration are purely legal we do not deem it necessary to make any reference to the individual facts in each of these cases except to note that the issue arises on account of the dispute raised by those qualified in terms of Regulations 6 and 7 of th