IN THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (Appellate Jurisdiction)

APPEAL NO. 51 OF 2020 Dated: 17.11.2022 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.K. Gauba, Officiating Chairperson Hon’ble Mr. Sandesh Kumar Sharma, Technical Member In the matter of:

M/s. Gallantt Ispat Limited, Through its Managing Director, 8^th Floor, Gallantt Landmark, Bank Road, Gorakhpur-273001. … Appellant Versus

1. Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, Through its Secretary, II Floor, UPERC Vidyut Niyamak Bhawan, Gomti Nagar, Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010.

2. Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd.

Through its Managing Director, Shakti Bhawan, 14-Ashok Marg, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226001.

3. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PUVVNL)

Through its Managing Director, Purvanchal Vidyut Bhawan, P.O. Vidyut Nagar, DLW, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh-221010 … Respondents Counsel for the Appellant(s) : Ms. Suparna Srivastava Mr. Tushar Mathur Counsel for the Respondent(s): Mr. C.K. Rai Mr. Sumit Panwar for R-1 Mr. Rajiv Srivastava for R-2&3

J U D G M E N T

PER HON’BLE MR. SANDESH KUMAR SHARMA, TECHNICAL MEMBER

1. M/s Gallantt Ispat Limited, (hereinafter “Appellant”) has filed the present Appeal being aggrieved by the Order dated 22.08.2019 (in brief “the Impugned Order”) passed by the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (herein after referred as “UPERC” or “State Commission”) in Petition No.1320/2018 (in short “Petition”)whereby, the State Commission has dismissed the Petition filed by the Appellant seeking exemption from installation of and billing through a ‘lag plus lead meter’ at the premises of the Appellant.

2. The Appellant is engaged in the business of manufacturing of iron and steel products such as sponge iron, bars, rods, billets etc. and has a co- generation power plant and enhanced its generation capacity from 18 MW to 53 MW consisting of two waste heat recovery boilers of 35 tones power hour (TPH) steam generation capacity and one fluidized bed combustion (FBC) boiler of

110 TPH besides existing FBC boiler of 50 TPH generation capacities.

3. Respondent No.1, the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission was established under Section 82 of the 2003 Act to discharge the functions as are laid down in Section 86 including functions relating to regulation of electricity and is vested with the powers to adjudicate the disputes raised in the present Appeal.

4. Respondent No.2, the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. (in short “UPPCL”) is responsible for electricity transmission and distribution within the State of Uttar Pradesh and for that purpose, procures power from various sources including from State/Central Government owned power generators and Independent Power Producers (IPPs) through Power Purchase Agreements entered into with them so as to ensure power supply to its consumers in a cost-

effective manner.

5. The Respondent No.3 - Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., (in short “PUVVNL”)is one the said restructured distribution companies of Respondent No.2 created for distribution of power in eastern area of Uttar Pradesh.

6. The Appellant claims that its generating plant produces two or more useful forms of energies, including electricity, and is thus a co-generation unit as per Section 2 (12) of the Act.

7. The Appellant entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Respondent No.2 for sale of 12.5 MW powerout of the total capacity of the plant whereas balance capacity is used for captive consumption.

8. Intermittently, the plant requires energy more than the capacity retained for captive use and therefore, the required electricity is drawn from the State grid, however, when operation of the plant requires less energy than the energy being generated in the plant, the resultant surplus energyis injected into the State grid.

9. The Appellant submitted that electricity exported or imported by the Appellant into or from the State Grid is billed by Respondent No.2 and 3 accordingly for their commercial gains.

10. It was however, submitted