MERC partly allows MSEDCL's review of its 30 Mar 2020 MYT Order; corrects additional surcharge, CSS and few cost items, rejects most other claims
Case of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. seeking review of the MYT Order dated 30 March 2020 issued in Case No 322 of 2019
MSEDCL filed a review petition under Regulation 85 of MERC Conduct of Business Regulations 2004 against the MYT Order dated 30 Mar 2020 (Case 322 of 2019), citing 13 alleged apparent errors with a claimed cumulative financial impact of Rs 3,171.99 Cr, covering RE power purchase costs, AG sales/distribution loss sharing, GFA reconciliation, PGCIL transmission charges, Khargone-II power purchase, additional surcharge computation, income tax/TDS, MPECS payments, cross-subsidy surcharge (CSS) errors, sliding-window demand measurement, and IT/ITeS tariff eligibility. CPPA and CMIA intervened opposing several prayers.
- Additional surcharge computation error corrected: recalculated using only thermal fixed cost/generation, raising FY20-21 rate to Rs 1.34/unit (Rs1.31/kVAh) from Rs1.31/unit (Rs1.28/kVAh), effective 1 April 2020 for full 4th Control Period
- CSS for HT Public Services-Others corrected (was wrongly mirroring Govt Edu/Hospitals category); revised CSS Rs2.25→Rs2.00/unit across FY21-25, effective 1 April 2020
- Distribution loss sharing energy-input error allowed: net impact of Rs246 Cr (of Rs561 Cr claimed) to be considered with carrying cost at MTR
- Income tax TDS of Rs1.18 Cr allowed; total FY18-19 income tax now Rs215.08 Cr, to be claimed with carrying cost at MTR
- Khargone-II 171 MU/Rs88 Cr power purchase omission acknowledged as error but no separate relief since FAC mechanism will pass through actual cost variation
- Rejected: RE non-solar Rs1650 Cr rate revision (partly allowed, no separate impact via FAC), AG sales revision, GFA reconciliation (Rs556 Cr), PGCIL transmission charges (Rs338 Cr), closing GFA FY18-19 correction, MPECS Rs0.26 Cr (opportunity given at MTR without carrying cost), and sliding-window demand measurement method
- MSEDCL to claim consequential impacts (loss-sharing Rs246 Cr, income tax Rs1.18 Cr) with carrying/holding cost in upcoming Mid Term Review (MTR) proceedings
- MSEDCL to reprogram all HT meters from sliding-window to 15-minute block demand measurement within 3 months of order; consumers not to be penalised during transition; cost not passed to consumers
- MSEDCL to file reconciliation of MPECS FY17-18 claim (Rs0.26 Cr) with audited accounts at MTR, without carrying cost if allowed
- MSEDCL to approach GoM's Industries/IT Department for guidance on IT & ITeS eligibility criteria and issue uniform field guidelines
- Revised additional surcharge and CSS tables to be applied retroactively from 1 April 2020 in consumer billing
- Corrigendum-style typographical corrections (e.g., CPP standby demand charge clause, HT category numbering) to be incorporated into the MYT Order text
- • Open access/C&I consumers face a higher Additional Surcharge (now Rs1.34/unit for FY20-21, rising across the control period) — directly increases cost of sourcing power via open access instead of MSEDCL
- • HT Public Services-Others consumers get a corrected (lower) CSS, while sliding-window relief means no immediate billing disruption for HT consumers with fluctuating loads until meters are reprogrammed in 3 months
- • RE (non-solar) power purchase cost pass-through via FAC mechanism confirmed instead of a one-time tariff hike — power purchase cost volatility will flow through fuel adjustment charges rather than fixed tariffs
- • IT/ITeS units get continued relief in principle (no mandatory GoM certification for industrial tariff) but eligibility clarity is deferred pending MSEDCL-GoM consultation, creating near-term classification uncertainty for such consumers
This is largely a technical clean-up order — MERC granted narrow, arithmetic corrections (additional surcharge, CSS, TDS, loss-sharing) while firmly rejecting MSEDCL's larger revenue asks (RE purchase rate, GFA reconciliation, PGCIL charges) as re-litigation rather than genuine errors. For C&I/OA users, the additional surcharge uptick is the most consequential and immediate cost signal; the sliding-window relief buys transitional comfort but the direction to revert to 15-minute blocks in 3 months should be tracked closely as it affects demand-charge billing accuracy for fluctuating loads. Developers evaluating captive/OA structures in Maharashtra should factor the revised (higher) surcharge trajectory through FY24-25 into cost models.
Growthifye does not take responsibility for the accuracy of this information. Values are compiled from tariff orders published on the websites of State Electricity Regulatory Commissions and distribution licensees (plus CEA / MoP / Grid-India), parsed automatically and shown with their source. Always verify against the signed order before any commercial decision. This one-pager is a Vidura-assisted summary of the official order; the signed order prevails.