Panaji
The state electricity department has for the current financial year decided not to increase any tariffs (front door) but has proposed an increase of Rs 0.76 per unit through the backdoor (service charge).
At the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (JERC) public hearing, the electricity department presented its petition for the consumers saying it didn’t want to burden the consumer and proposed to fill the revenue gap of Rs 149 crore from the state budget.
It however also proposed a collection of Rs. 0.76 per unit from consumers to make up for payments to power supplied from Maharashtra.
Tariff revisions were increased in the year 2012 by 11.8 percent, in 2014 by 7.6 percent, in 2015 by 14 percent and in 2016 by 4.85 percent. “Electricity Department of Goa (EDG) feels that considering the past trend of the tariff hike, it doesn’t want to over burden the consumers by tariff hike and therefore proposed to meet the gap from the budgetary support to be provided by the Government of Goa,” said the Electricity Department, Goa in its petition.
It also said that some consumers in the state were getting power supplied from the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Corporation Ltd (MSEDCL) due to lack of “distribution infrastructure of EDG.” The corporation issues bills to the department which is then issued to the consumer.
The department therefore sought approval from JERC to recover service charges by billing and collection by the department. This service charge will be charged at Rs 0.76 per unit.
For the year 2017-18 the department proposes to purchase 3,494 million units from MSEDCL which means it will earn Rs 256 crore from the service charge it has proposed.
The question is if the government proposes to finance the revenue gap of Rs 149 crore through the Budget, why does it need an additional Rs 265 crore? Is the department using the back door to pay for accumulated budget gaps which were not financed through the budget in earlier years?
The public meeting that was attended by members of consumer forum groups as well as individuals themselves raised several operational issues they’ve faced especially in terms of bill payment and LED lighting.
Many consumers complained that bills were being given not on a monthly basis but in gaps of over six months. Chief Electrical Engineer Lekshmanan S speaking to consumers said there had been billing issues in the past but was currently being issued in the monthly and bi monthly system.
The hearing that was presided over by JERC chairperson MK Goel suggested issuing provisional bills in case there was no bill issued for that month.
Other issues that were raised included load fluctuations, the government scheme that offered three free bulbs and the issue of stealing power.
Taking all the issues into account, Goel said, “Most of the concerns raised by consumers are of the operational kind and not related to tariff, due to which they are not satisfied. We will go through all the issues and petition submitted and give our decision after.”
