Chandigarh residents raise red flags over power tariff hike proposal at JERC hearing

Residents expressed strong resentment over the proposed hike, citing that tariffs had already been increased recently; another hike would be a double blow to consumers, said members of various residents’ associations

Residents vehemently opposed the proposed hike in electricity tariffs during a public hearing conducted by the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (JERC) on Friday. The hearing was held in response to a petition submitted by Chandigarh Power Distribution Limited (CPDL), seeking approval for revised tariffs for the financial years 2025-26 to 2029-30.

Chandigarh Power Distribution Limited has projected a cumulative revenue gap of ₹982 crore (excluding carrying costs) over the next five years and has requested a suitable tariff revision to cover the shortfall. (HT File Photo for representation)

In its petition, CPDL stated that the projected revenue from power sales at the current rates is insufficient to meet the estimated costs of efficient electricity distribution. The utility company has projected a cumulative revenue gap of ₹982 crore (excluding carrying costs) over the next five years and has requested a suitable tariff revision to cover the shortfall.

Residents, however, expressed strong resentment over the proposed hike, citing that tariffs had already been increased recently. “Another hike would be a double blow to consumers,” said members of various residents’ associations.

Indian Citizens’ Forum (ICF) president SK Nayar and secretary Narinder Sharma pointed out that CPDL has launched a load self-declaration scheme for low-tension (LT) consumers. They claimed the form provided is neither approved by the JERC nor in accordance with the JERC Supply Code, making it difficult for consumers to fill correctly. This, they said, could lead to inflated bills due to misdeclared load and requested that the scheme be put on hold until proper approval is obtained.

The ICF also raised concerns about the transfer of 220KV substations and feeders to CPDL, stating that assets above 66KV fall under the jurisdiction of the transmission utility, not the distribution licencee. They demanded separate tariff approvals for transmission and exclusion of transmission losses from the current petition.

Highlighting inefficiencies, the ICF noted that losses mentioned in Para 4.2.5 of the petition are higher than those approved previously, indicating a lack of effort by the former licencee. They urged the commission not to pass these losses onto consumers.