Case: Power Grid Corp.Of India Ltd Vs. Punjab State Power Corp.Ltd

4. Brief facts of the case are that appellant Power Grid Corporation of India (for short "Power Grid") is a transmission licensee who constructed 400 KVdouble circuit transmission. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (respondent No. 1) is one of the beneficiaries who is aof Punjab State Electricity Board. Appellant had entered into contractual agreement, i.e Bulk Power Transmission Agreement with respondent No. 1 and other beneficiaries for providing the service of transmission lines. National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) was constructing a Super Thermal Power Station at Barh in the State of Bihar. The construction of theincluding the switchgear and protection system at the Barh end was within the scope of work undertaken by NTPC. It is pleaded by the appellant that it had duly constructed and completed the work assigned to it by 30th June, 2010. It is further pleaded that the line was duly charged with all reactors and battery chargers in service and auxiliary supply was available and the system was running.5. Onthe appellant filed a petition (No. 267 of 2010) before CERC for determination of transmission tariff for the period from4. Admittedly the petition was heard by CERC onand till that date respondent No. 1 had not raised any objection. The matter was reserved for the Judgment. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 appears to have filed an affidavit stating that line was not operational. CERC, vide order dateddecided the tariff for10, payable by beneficiaries. Aggrieved by said order respondent No. 1 filed the appeal (No. 123 of 2011) before the Tribunal and pleaded that since condition of trial operation and regulatory services were not fulfilled, as such, the Central Commission erred in declaring the tariff w.e.f.The Tribunal accepted the plea of respondent No. 1, and remanded the matter. Hence, these appeals.

Reasoning: (72) of Section 2 of Electricity Act, 2003 defines the word "transmission lines", which reads as"transmission lines" means all high pressure cables and overhead lines (not being an essential part of the distribution system of a licensee) transmitting electricity from a generating station to another generating station or atogether with anywn transformers,switchgear and other worksnecessary to and used for the control of such cables or overhead lines, and such buildings or part thereof as may be required to accommodate such transformers,From the above definition, it is clear thatswitchgear and other worksare part of transmission lines. In our opinion, Regulation 3 (12) of the Regulations, 2009 cannot be interpreted against the spirit of the definition of "transmission lines" given in the statute. It is evident from record that it is not a disputed fact that switchgear at Barh end ofline for protection and metering were to be installed by NTPC and the same was not done by it when transmission line was completed by the appellant. As such the appellant might have suffered due to delay on the part of NTPC in completing the transmission lines for some period. But beneficiaries, including respondent No. 1, cannot be made liable to pay for this delay w.e.f. 01.07.2010 as the energy supply line had not started on said date.12. We are apprised at the bar that meanwhile during the pendency of these appeals, in compliance of the interim order, after hearing all the concerned parties, C.E.R.C. has decided the matter onand transmission line has been now declared successfully charged w.e.f.and the commercial operation has started on said date. However, the order datedpassed by CERC is stated to be operative subject to decision of this Court in the present appeals, due to the interim order passed by this court.