 "Delhi govt seeks action against appointment of DERC principal advisor")
The Delhi government's vigilance directorate has written to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL), recommending action against three former and a sitting DERC official in connection with the appointment of Ashok Kumar Singhal as the principal advisor (tariff) to the power regulator.
There was no immediate reaction from the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) on the issue.
Singhal termed the whole matter "pointless".
"There is no issue in it. My appointment was done in a proper manner," he told PTI.
The directorate, in a communication dated June 27, said the matter of appointment of DERC member Singhal as the principal advisor (tariff) was examined by it.
"It emerges that the DERC has not examined the issue legally and has been totally biased in selecting Ashok Kumar Singhal as the principal advisor (tariff) after he demitted the office of member DERC," it said.
More From This Section
The directorate further said the DERC has "violated" section 89(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003, as Singhal was appointed as the principal advisor (tariff) after demitting office as member, DERC.
The Ministry of Power had written to APTEL in February for an enquiry against the DERC member.
In a reference to the APTEL chairperson, the ministry had listed various "instances of transgressions" on the DERC's part.
The Electricity Act, 2003, provides that the power tariff should be cost-reflective and mandates that the appropriate commission, while determining the tariff, will be guided by the objective that the tariff progressively reflects the cost of electricity supply and also reduces cross-subsidies within a specified period, it had charged.
The vigilance directorate communication to the APTEL also alleged that the DERC is not functioning in accordance with the procedures established through norms and judicial pronouncements, and cited certain instances in this regard.
The directorate further alleged that the "lapses" on the DERC's part were due to a "lack of transparency".
The vigilance directorate recommended "appropriate action" against Singhal and others to the APTEL.