APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY AT NEW DELHI (APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

APPEAL NO. 267 OF 2023 & IA NO. 243 OF 2025 Dated: 4th July, 2025 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan, Chairperson Hon’ble Ms. Seema Gupta, Technical Member (Electricity)

In the matter of:

SURYA ALLOY INDUSTRIES LIMITED Through its Director

1/1 Camac Street, 3rd Floor, … Appellant Kolkata – 700016.

VERSUS

1. WEST BENGAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through its Secretary Plot No. AH/5 (2^nd & 4^th Floor), Premises No. MAR 16-1111, Action Area 1A Newtown, Rajarhat Kolkata - 700163 … Respondent No.1

2. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION Through its CMD DVC Towers, VIP Road Kolkata – 700054. … Respondent No.2 Counsel for the Appellant(s): Amit Kapur Akshat Jain Shefali Tripathi Aditya H. Dubeyt Sagnik Maitra Avdesh Mandloi Counsel for the Respondent(s): C. K. Rai Sumit Panwar for Res.1 Shri Venkatesh Shryeshth Ramesh Sharma Kanika Chugh Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava Abhishek Nangia Akash Lamba Siddharth Nigotia Shivam Kumar Kartikay Trivedi Aashwyn Singh Mohit Gupta Manu Tiwari Harsh Vardhan Aniket Kanhaua Suhael Buttan Priya Dhankar Anant Singh Vineet Kumar Nikunj Bhatnagar Kunal Veer Chopra Vedant Choudhary Nihal Bhardwaj for Res.2 JUDGEMENT PER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN, CHAIRPERSON I. INTRODUCTION:

The Appellant, Surya Alloy Industries Ltd, has filed the present Appeal challenging the Order passed by the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission, in Case No. C-15/993 (“Petition”) dated 12.08.2022, which related to the demand of Damodar Valley Corporation to pay additional energy charges during the restricted drawal period. The main ground on which the Impugned Order is subjected to challenge in this Appeal is that the said Order contravenes Regulation 2.14.1 of the WBERC (Conduct of Business Regulations) 2013, which envisages that the Orders passed by the WBERC shall be signed by (all) the members who considered and/or heard the matter :-

Facts, not in dispute, are that, on 31.01.2022, the Petition, filed before the WBERC by the Appellant herein, was heard by a quorum consisting of the Chairperson and two other Members. On 28.04.2022, Mr. Durgadas Goswami, Member of the WBERC, retired. On 18.07.2022, an e-hearing was held, before the WBERC, as noted in Para 1.6 of the Impugned Order. On 01.08.2022, the Chairperson of the WBERC retired. On 12.08.2022, the Impugned Order was passed by the WBERC. The covering page of the impugned order notes the presence of the Chairperson (who had retired)

along with another Member, but was signed by only one Member.

The limited issue to be decided in this Appeal is whether the WBERC acted in contravention of Regulations 2.14.1 & 2.14.2 of the WBERC (Conduct of Business Regulations), 2013 read with Section 86(3) of the Electricity Act, and whether the rule of natural justice, that “one who hears must decide”, is attracted.

II. BACKGROUND FACTS:

The Appellant herein filed WPA No. 3077 of 2019 before the Calcutta High Court challenging the validity of Regulation 4.4 of the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, as also the demand of additional energy charges on account of restricted drawal as contained in the bills for the months of June, 2015 till December, 2018.

In its order, in WPA No. 3077 of 2019 dated 12.02.2021, the Calcutta High Court observed that, in so far as the demand for additional energy charges was concerned, the matter was required to be decided by the West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short “WBERC”), as the WBERC had decided a similar issue in respect of three months, being August, September and October, 2018, by its order dated 11.12.2020. The Appellant herein was permitted to approach the WEBRC before 1^st March, 2021 regarding their grievances in relation to the demand of additional energy charge on account of restricted drawal as contained in the bills for the months of June, 2015 to December, 2018. The Calcutta High Court f