Rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioner, Damodar

DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION

Rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioner, Damodar

Valley Corporation to the Objections filed by

Respondent No. 7 i.e. Damodar Valley Power

Consumers’ Association (DVPCA) in Petition

No. 571/GT/2020 for truing up of annual fixed

charges for the 2014-19 tariff period and for

determination of tariff for the 2019-24 tariff

period in respect of Mejia Thermal Power

Station (MTPS), Units- 5&6 (2x250MW)

P a g e | 2

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY

REGULATORY COMMISSION

3RD& 4TH FLOOR, CHANDERLOK BUILDING,

36, JANPATH, NEW DELHI-110 001

Petition No. 571/GT/2020

IN THE MATTER OF:

Rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioner, Damodar Valley Corporation to the

Objections filed by Respondent No. 7 i.e. Damodar Valley Power Consumers’

Association (DVPCA) in Petition No. 571/GT/2020 for truing up of annual fixed

charges for the 2014-19 tariff period and for determination of tariff for the 2019-

24 tariff period in respect of Mejia Thermal Power Station (MTPS), Units- 5&6

(2x250MW)

AND IN THE MATTER OF:

Damodar Valley Corporation

DVC Towers, VIP Road,

Kolkata -700 054 ----- Petitioner

VERSUS

1. BSES-Rajdhani Power Ltd.,

2. BSES-Yamuna Power Ltd.,

3. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.,

4. Madhya Pradesh Power Management Co. Ltd.

5. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited

6. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited

7. Damodar Valley Power Consumers Association

----- Respondents

P a g e | 3

INDEX OF PAPERS

Sl.

No. Particulars Page No

1. Affidavit 4-5

2.

Rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioner, Damodar

Valley Corporation to the Objections filed by

Respondent No. 7 i.e. Damodar Valley Power

Consumers’ Association (DVPCA) in Petition

No. 571/GT/2020

6-10

3.

Annexure-1: Ministry of Environment, Forest

and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Government of

India Environment (Protection) Amendment

Rules, 2015 Notification dt. 07.12.2015

20-25

Deputy Chief Engineer (Commercial)

For and on behalf of


Date: July 16, 2021

Place: Kolkata

P a g e | 4

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY

REGULATORY COMMISSION

3RD& 4TH FLOOR, CHANDERLOK BUILDING,

36, JANPATH, NEW DELHI-110 001


IN THE MATTER OF:






(2x250MW)



DVC Towers, VIP Road,

Kolkata -700 054 ----- Petitioner

VERSUS

1. BSES-Rajdhani Power Ltd.,

2. BSES-Yamuna Power Ltd.,

3. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.,

4. Madhya Pradesh Power Management Co. Ltd.

5. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited

6. Jharkhand Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited

7. Damodar Valley Power Consumers Association

-----Respondents

P a g e | 5

AFFIDAVIT

I, Subrata Ganguly, son of Late Shanti Ranjan Ganguly aged about 56 years and resident

of D-19/21, Kalyani, Nadia, Pin- 741235 do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:

1. I am the Deputy Chief Engineer (Commercial) of Damodar Valley Corporation,

the Petitioner and well conversant with the facts of the case, hence competent to

swear this affidavit. I am duly authorized to do so.

2. I say that in response to the reply filed by Respondent No. 7 i.e. Damodar

Valley Power Consumers’ Association (DVPCA), against tariff Petition No.

571/GT/2020, the Petitioner Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) is filing

herewith the rejoinder relating to petition for truing up of annual fixed charges

for the 2014-19 tariff period and for determination of tariff for the 2019-24 tariff

period in respect of Mejia Thermal Power Station (MTPS), Units- 5&6

(2x250MW).

3. I say that I have read and understood the contents of the accompanying rejoinder

along with all annexures. Further, I say that the same are based on the records

maintained by the Petitioner in the normal course of business and believed by

the deponent to be true.

Deponent

Verification,

I, the deponent above named, do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit

are true to the knowledge of the deponent and believed by the deponent to be true, no

part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

Deponent

Verified at Kolkata

On the July 16, 2021

P a g e | 6

BEFORE THE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY

COMMISSION

3RD& 4TH FLOOR, CHANDRALOK BUILDING,

36 JANPATH, NEW DELHI-110 001


IN THE MATTER OF:






(2x250MW)


Damodar Valley Corporation …. Petitioner

VERSUS

BSES-Rajdhani Power Ltd. (BRPL) and Others ……Respondents

P a g e | 7

REJOINDER OF DVC TO THE OBJECTION FILED BY DAMODAR

VALLEY POWER CONSUMERS’ ASSOCIATION

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. Before answering para-wise to the reply filed by Respondent no.7 - Damodar

Valley Power Consumers’ Association (herein after referred to as

‘DVPCA’/respondent), Damodar Valley Corporation (hereinafter referred to as

`DVC’/Petitioner) craves leave to refer to the following facts which are relevant

for the proper appreciation of the matter in issue:-

2. DVC is a statutory body established under the Damodar Valley Corporation Act,

1948 (hereinafter referred to as `DVC Act’).

3. DVC Act, 1948 under which DVC operates, is a Central Act and a special

Legislation dealing with the developments of Damodar Valley. The Damodar

Valley falls partly in the territory of the State of West Bengal and partly in the

State of Jharkhand. DVC is controlled by the Central Government.

4. Section 12 of the DVC Act provides for the functions of the DVC and it reads

as under:

“12. Functions of the Corporation:

The functions of the Corporation shall be –

(a) the promotion and operation of schemes for irrigation, water supply

and drainage,

(b) the promotion and operation of schemes for the generation,

transmission, and distribution of electrical energy, both hydroelectric

and thermal,

(c) the promotion and operation of schemes for flood control in the

Damodar river and its tributaries and the channels, if any, excavated

by the Corporation in connection with the scheme and for the

improvement of flow conditions in the Hooghly river,

(d) the promotion and control of navigation in the Damodar river and its

tributaries and channels, if any,

(e) the promotion of afforestation and control of soil erosion in the

Damodar Valley, and

P a g e | 8

(f) the promotion of public health and the agricultural, industrial,

economic and general well-being in the Damodar Valley and its area

of operation”.

5. DVC has multifarious functions in the Damodar Valley Area. DVC has the

obligation to undertake development of Damodar Valley Area, which falls in the

provinces of West Bengal and Jharkhand. The electricity related activities of

DVC are not restricted to generation and transmission of electricity but also (a)

sale of electricity to licensees; and (b) distribution and retail supply of electricity

to consumers/end users in the Command Area. The other functions of the DVC

include promotion and operation of schemes for irrigation, water supply and

drainage, flood control and improvement of flow conditions in the Hooghly

river, navigation in the Damodar river and its tributaries and channels,

afforestation and control of soil erosion in the Damodar Valley and promotion

of public health and agricultural, industrial, economic and general well-being in

the Damodar Valley under its areas of operation.

6. Thus, DVC is engaged in number of activities which are not commercial in

nature and where from no significant revenue accrues to DVC. DVC cannot

generate required revenue from the users of service in regard to schemes such as

drainage, flood control, improvement in the flow conditions, navigation,

afforestation and control of soil erosion or the promotion of public health and

general well-being in the Damodar Valley Area. The main revenue earning

activity performed by DVC is generation and sale of electricity.

7. DVC is undertaking various activities in a comprehensive manner for the

betterment of Damodar Valley Area and using the revenues earned from various

sources including and in particular from generation and sale of electricity for the

above varied purposes for which DVC has been established.

8. The tariff determination process for DVC should also consider the special

provisions of Part IV of the DVC Act, 1948, as has been held by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court vide judgment dated 23.7.2018 in the matter of Bhaskar-Shrachi

P a g e | 9

Alloys Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation (2018) 8 SCC 281 upholding the

decision of the Hon’ble Tribunal in the order dated 23.11.2007.

9. In terms of 4th proviso of Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003, DVC is

declared as a ‘Deemed Licensee’.

10. DVC also undertakes the supply of electricity to the consumers in its authorized

area of operation as a Distribution Licensee in terms of Section 42 of Electricity

Act, 2003.

11. In accordance with the above, DVC –

a. is a Generating Company controlled by the Central Government within

the meaning of Section 79 (1) (a) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

b. has transmission activities on the transmission system which is

integrated and falls within the territory of the two States, namely, the

State of West Bengal and the State of Jharkhand and, therefore, is an

Inter State Transmission System and Line within the meaning of Section

2 (36) of the Electricity Act, 2003;

c. undertakes Distribution and Retail Supply of Electricity to the specified

consumers within the Command Area which again falls within the

territories of the two States, namely, the State of West Bengal and the

State of Jharkhand in terms of section 62 (1) (d) of the Electricity Act,

2003.

Thus, tariff for retail sale and supply of electricity in the Damodar Valley area is

governed by the provisions of Section 62 (1) (d) read with Section 86 (1) of the

Electricity Act, 2003 and is determined by the respective State Electricity

Regulatory Commissions in the states of West Bengal and Jharkhand.

12. The tariff determined by this Hon’ble Commission for generation and

transmission becomes an input cost for DVC in the activities of distribution and

retail supply of electricity in the Damodar Valley area.

P a g e | 10

13. In the light of the above preliminary submissions, the response to issues raised

in the ‘replies’ filed by the Damodar Valley Power Consumers’ Association

(‘DVPCA’ or ‘respondent’) in respect of truing-up petition for 2014-19 and tariff

petition for 2019-24 for MTPS Units- 5&6 (2x250MW) are as under:

Rejoinder of DVC against Para wise reply filed by DVPCA:

Para 1: Additional Capitalization Vs Compensation Allowance:

14. DVC humbly submitted that the Compensation Allowance as allowed under the

Tariff Regulations, 2014 is normative in nature. A reference to the Statement of

Reasons of Tariff Regulations, 2014 clarifies the same, as provided below:

“18.4 The Commission is of the view that the objective of allowing

Compensation Allowance is to take care of expenses on new assets of

capital nature including minor assets and as the requirement of such assets

may arise after certain years of operation, the Compensation Allowance

has been provided from eleventh year of operation. After completion of the

useful life of the thermal generating station, the generating company can

either opt for Renovation & Modernisation or opt for Special Allowance

and hence, the Compensation Allowance has been provided upto 25 years

only. As regards the escalation of compensation allowance based on actual

inflation rate, the Commission is of the view that when this allowance is

being permitted on normative basis irrespective of expenditure incurred, it

may not be appropriate to consider the escalation on the same…”

15. As stated in the Statement of Reasons of Tariff Regulations, 2014 above, the

Compensation Allowance permitted is normative in nature and does essentially

cover the actual expenditure incurred the utility. In case of DVC also, the O&M

expenses include acquiring of small assets (viz. tools and plants) required for

rendering 24x7 quality power supply to the beneficiaries and such expenses are

covered through compensation allowance as laid down in the 2014 tariff

P a g e | 11

Regulations from the 11th year of operation. In regard to the above, the

petitioner has submitted all relevant details as Appendix-1 of the 2014-19 tariff

forms submitted with original petition as Annexure-1. Hence, DVPCA’s

contention in this regard is misleading and needs to be rejected.

16. DVC also submits that based on the justification and details furnished by DVC

this Hon’ble Commission in order dated 31.08.2016 in petition no.

347/GT/2014 has allowed add-cap along with compensation allowance for the

2014-19 control period. It is further submitted that this Hon’ble Commission

has already allowed compensation allowance in addition to add cap in the tariff

orders for 2014-19 period for MTPS 4 (order dated 20.09.2016 in petition no.

352/GT/2014), MTPS 5,6 (order dated 16.03.2017 in petition no.

144/GT/2015) and BTPS 1-3 (order dated 27.09.2016 in petition no.

350/GT/2014).

17. In light of the above, this Hon’ble Commission is humbly requested to kindly

reject the plea of DVPCA and allow the Compensation Allowance as claimed by

DVC.

Para 2: Special Allowance (2019-24):

18. DVC humbly submits that the Special Allowance has not been claimed for

MTPS Units 5&6 for the 2019-24 control period.

Para 3: Double Allowance of Bonds’ Amount [2014-19 & 2019-24]:

19. DVC humbly submits that the matter related to Sinking Fund has already been

settled through various litigations by APTEL from the period 2007 to 2019.

20. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Tribunal in its Order dated

23.11.2007 in appeal nos. 271,272,273,275 of 2006 (Ref: Para 82, Page 51 &

Para E.15, Page 88) had settled the issue related to Sinking Fund in favor of

DVC. The said judgment of the Hon’ble Tribunal dated 23.11.2007 was upheld

by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide judgement dated 23.07.2018 in Bhaskar-

Shrachi Alloys Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation (2018) 8 SCC 281 (ref: Para

P a g e | 12

50 Page 48 of Judgement). DVC therefore submits that, further agitation

regarding this issue may be discouraged by this Hon’ble Commission.

21. DVC also submits that the Hon’ble Tribunal in its judgement dated 17.05.2019

in case of Appeal No .17 of 2014 & batch was of the opinion that there was no

double allowance of bonds. The above appeal was filed by the industrial

consumers represented by the objector i.e. DVPCA and DVC was one of the

respondent. The relevant excerpts from the judgement is reproduced below:

8.5 We have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel for the

Appellants and learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 and also took note

of the various judgments relied upon by the parties. While the main

contentions of the learned counsel for the Appellants are against the

allowance of contribution to sinking fund to DVC and its utilisation, on the

other hand, leaned counsel for the Respondents contend that the Central

Commission is allowing the same as per settled position of law and its relevant

regulations relating to the subject. Learned counsel for the Appellants

contended that this Tribunal did not lay down that DVC could be allowed with

both interest on loan as well as contribution to sinking fund which tantamount

to a particular cost component being allowed twice to a generating company.

“8.6. It is relevant to note that as per Section 40 of DVC Act, 1948, DVC is

entitled for provision for depreciation, reserve and other fund. This Tribunal

in its judgment dated 23.11.2007 in Appeal No.271 of 2006 & batch has held

the admissibility of sinking fund in favour of DVC which has also been upheld

by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 23.7.2018 reported as

2018 (8) SCC 281. Regarding the contention of alleged double counting of

learned counsel for the Appellant, we find no such duplication in the

considerations and findings of the Central Commission.”

P a g e | 13

8.7 Further, from the Tariff Regulation of the Central Commission, it is

noticed that interest on loan and interest on working capital are distinct

elements of the tariff and at no point of time, the repayment of loan capital is

considered as a tariff element to be serviced in the tariff. The redemption of

bonds from contribution to sinking fund is a special tariff element provided

for DVC under Section 40 of the DVC Act, 1948 in addition to tariff elements

provided in the Tariff Regulations. This aspect has already been upheld by

the Apex court vide its judgment dated 23.7.2018 (stated supra). It is also

noted from the tariff regulations that depreciation and interest on loan

payable are two different aspects while sinking fund contribution is an

additional tariff element admissible only to DVC under the DVC Act. We,

therefore, find no force in the contentions of the learned counsel for the

Appellants that by allowing depreciation, interests on loan and sinking fund

altogether, results into double counting and in turn yields into undue burden

on consumers.

8.8 In view of above facts, we hold that the Central Commission has passed

the impugned order in accordance with settled position of law and its

Regulations. Thus, the instant case does not give in any manner rise to

substantial question of law requiring our intervention / interference.

22. It is submitted that though Review Petition no. 4 of 2019 has been filed by

DVPCA, in the matter of Maithon Alloys Ltd. vs Central Electricity Regulatory

Commission & Ors, there is no stay of the above decision of the Hon’ble

Tribunal and therefore for all purposes the same is binding on all the parties .

23. In consideration of the above, it can be concluded that the DVPCA’s contentions

are not logical. DVPCA has wrongly mixed the issue of Sinking Fund with

depreciation. This Hon’ble Commission is therefore humbly requested to kindly

reject the plea of the objector and approve the Sinking Fund contribution and

depreciation amount as claimed by DVC.

P a g e | 14

Para 4: Water Charges [2014-19 & 2019-24]:

24. As already stated above, DVC is a statutory body established under the Damodar

Valley Corporation Act, 1948. As such the fixation of Rates for supply of water

for industrial purposes is governed by Section-15 of the DVC Act and approved

by the DVC Board consisting of members from the Central Government and the

respective state governments of West Bengal and Jharkhand. It is also pertinent

to mention here that the expenses related to water management increased in the

2014-19 control period due to increase in employee costs due to 7th central pay

commission revision and capital expenditure incurred from time to time. Thus,

there is overall increase in running expenses that is factored in while revising the

rates for water consumption by the DVC Board.

25. DVC also submits that, the water charge notification for the 2014-19 period is

based on DVRRC notification effective from 01.10.2012 and the same is

submitted as part of ROP response in hearing dated 25.05.2021 as Annexure11.

The new water charge rate is applicable from 01.04.2019.

26. DVC also submits that the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

(MoEFCC), Government of India vide the Environment (Protection)

Amendment Rules, 2015 dt. 07.12.2015 has set norm for specific water

consumption for all existing Cooling Tower-based Thermal Power Plants as 3.5

m3/MWh. The relevant extract of the notification is provided below:

“2. In the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, in Schedule – I, -

(a) after serial number 5 and entries relating thereto, the following serial

number and entries shall be inserted, namely:—

Sr. No. Industry Parameter Standards

1 2 3 4

“5A Thermal Power

Plant (Water

consumption

limit)

Water

consumption

I. All plants with Once Through Cooling

(OTC)shall install Cooling Tower (CT)

and achieve specific water consumption

upto maximum of 3.5m3/MWh within a

period of two years from the date of

publication of this notification.

II. All existing CT-based plants reduce

specific water consumption upto

P a g e | 15

maximum of 3.5m3/MWh within a period

of two years from the date of publication

of this notification.

III. New plants to be installed after 1st

January, 2017 shall have to meet specific

water consumption upto maximum of 2.5

m3/MWh and achieve zero waste water

discharged”;

The notification is being submitted and attached as Annexure-1.

27. This is evident from the above notification that, the target timeline to achieve the

specific consumption norms is 06.12.2017, i.e. two years from the date of

publication of the said notification and the petitioner has successfully achieved

the timeline in reducing the water consumption during the control period.

28. DVC also submits that as per Regulation 29 (2), of the 2014 Tariff Regulations,

this Hon’ble Commission has allowed water charges based on water

consumption depending upon type of plant, type of cooling water system etc.

The relevant portion of the regulation being reproduced below:

“(2)…….Provided that water charges shall be allowed based on water

consumption depending upon type of plant, type of cooling water system

etc., subject to prudence check. The details regarding the same shall be

furnished along with the petition”

29. Thus, old plants especially MTPS Units 5&6 with COD in 2008, the normative

water consumption can be higher than the 2015 norms as set by MOEFCC vide

notification dated 07.12.2015. DVC has already submitted the technical details

of the plant in Form-2 of the 2014-19 tariff forms.

30. This Hon’ble Commission in the Statement of Reasons for the Tariff

Regulations, 2014 has mentioned about the uncontrollable nature of water

charges as following:

“29.21…Further, the Commission has already provided for payment of water

charges, which is determined by the State agencies and over which generator

has no direct control.…”

P a g e | 16

31. This Hon’ble Commission has also through Tariff Regulations 2014 provided

for recovery of water charges recovery separately considering the said

expenses as additional to O&M Expenses as it is not included as part of the

O&M norms.

32. Further this Hon’ble Commission in order dated 29.07.2016 in petition no.

294/GT/2014 in the case of NTPC Simhadri Super Thermal Power Station

Stage-II (1000 MW) for 2014-19 had allowed water charges at a rate of

Rs.12.39/Cum for FY 2013-14 with an escalation of 5% per annum. DVC

therefore submits that the rate of water charges (i.e. Rs. 5.70/Kl) as claimed for

the 2014-19 period is not unprecedented and abnormal as contented by

DVPCA.

33. DVC humbly requests this Hon’ble Commission to allow the water charges as

claimed by DVC for the period 2014-19 true up period and 2019-24 tariff

determination period.

Para 5: Operation & Maintenance:

34. DVC would like to reiterate its submission in the matter of O&M Expenses

made in its earlier submission (Rejoinder of DVC to reply filed by DVPCA

vide affidavit dated 05.11.2020 in Petition no. 571/GT/2020). The same is not

repeated here for the sake of brevity.

35. Regarding DVPCAs contentions vide Para 5.1 of the reply, DVC humbly

submits that in the National Tariff Policy, 2016 prescribes that:

“the operating parameters in tariffs should be at “normative levels” only and

not at “lower of normative and actuals”. This is essential to encourage better

operating performance.”

The Objector’s contention in this regard therefore lacks merit.

P a g e | 17

36. DVC has filed true up petition for 2014-19 period and not for 2009-14 period.

The Petitioner has submitted additional information as per the directives of this

Hon’ble Commission through ROP on hearing dated 25.05.2021.

37. DVC would like to point towards the fact that this objections are repetitive in

nature. There are host of APTEL judgements in matter of pay revision in favor

of petitioner’s claim. The Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal of Electricity (Hon’ble

Tribunal) vide its Order dated 24.03.2015 in the batch matter of Appeal No. 55

of 2013 was pleased to uphold the decision of this Hon’ble Commission with

regard to the additional costs towards pay revision. The Hon’ble Supreme Court

in the case of West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v CESC Limited

(2002) 8 SCC 715 also stated that the employee expenses are governed by

lawful agreements and hence those are legitimate expenses to be allowed.

38. It is also submitted that the implementation of the pay revision w.e.f.

01.01.2016 was based on the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay

Commission. The CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014 were notified by this Hon'ble

Commission on 21.02.2014. The norms for O&M expenses provided by the

Tariff Regulations, 2014 were founded on the basis of actual O&M expenses

for FY 2008-09 to FY 2012-13, i.e. prior to the implementation of the pay

revision.

39. Accordingly, in arriving at the O&M norms for 2014-19 period, this Hon’ble

Commission had no occasion to consider the impact of pay revision w.e.f.

01.01.2016. The recovery of the impact of pay revision is to be considered and

allowed in line with Tariff principles enshrined under Section 61(d) of the

Electricity Act, 2003.

40. Regarding the DVPCA’s contentions vide para 5.2 of the reply, DVC humbly

submits that DVC has claimed employee benefit expenses for power business

for 2016-19 period as per DVC’s annual accounts.

P a g e | 18

41. In line with the said submission, DVC hereby submits that DVPCA’s

contentions are misconstrued in the matter of O&M Expenses as well and may

kindly be rejected by this Hon’ble Commission. DVC humbly requests this

Hon’ble Commission to allow the O&M as claimed by DVC.

Para 6: Pension & Gratuity (P&G) Fund Contribution:

42. DVC would like to submit that the Hon’ble APTEL in its Order dt. 23.11.2007

in appeal no. 273 of 2006 and batch has allowed the Pension & Gratuity

Contribution to be recovered in full through tariff in Para D.1 to D.10 (Ref:

pages 76 to 80 of the said order).

43. The above judgment of the Hon’ble Tribunal has been affirmed by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court vide judgment dated 23.07.2018 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.

971-973 of 2008 along with Civil Appeal Nos. 4289 of 2008 in the matter of

Bhaskar Shrachi Alloys Ltd. vs. Damodar Valley Corporation (2018) 8 SCC

281 (Ref: Page 49-51 & Para 52-54 of the judgement).

44. This Hon’ble Commission vide Order dt. 04.09.2019 in Petition no.

197/MP/2016 granted liberty to the petitioner to claim the said relief with all

relevant information/ documents including the (a) actuarial valuation; (b)

actual data duly audited and certified by the auditor and (c) annual accounts of

the pension fund, at the time of truing up of tariff in terms of Regulation 8 of

the 2014 Tariff Regulations.

45. DVC would also reiterate that as per recommendation of the 7th Pay

Commission, the Cabinet on 12.09.2017 cleared the Payment of Gratuity

(Amendment Bill 2017), where it has been stipulated to increase the upper

ceiling of gratuity from the present value of Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 20 lakhs

effective from 01.01.2016. Since the impact of enhancement of the upper

ceiling of gratuity has not been considered / factored by the Hon’ble

Commission while fixing the normative O&M expenses for 2014-19, DVC

P a g e | 19

humbly requests to consider the impact while considering the P&G

contribution for 2014-19 period.

46. In line with the said submissions, DVC hereby submits that the Respondent’s

contentions are misconstrued in the matter of Contribution to Pension &

Gratuity and may kindly be rejected by this Hon’ble Commission. DVC

humbly requests this Hon’ble Commission to allow claimed amount pertaining

to contribution to Pension & Gratuity as claimed by DVC for the 2014-19

period in full on sharing basis.

Para 7: DVPCA’s impleadment:

47. The petitioner humbly submits that, Para 7 requires no reply.

PLACE: KOLKATA DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION

DATED: 16-Jul-21

P a g e | 20

ANNEXURE-1

P a g e | 21

P a g e | 22

P a g e | 23

P a g e | 24

P a g e | 25

Date post:	26-Jan-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Rejoinder on behalf of the Petitioner, Damodar

Documents