SC seeks Delhi govt reply over regular DERC appointments

The Supreme Court seeks Delhi's response on appointing members for the DERC, currently lacking a chairperson, impacting consumer rights.

The Supreme Court has sought Delhi government’s response over appointment of regular members for the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC), which currently has no chairperson and is functioning with two pro-tem (temporary) members.

(Getty Images/iStockphoto)

A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on the petition filed by NGO Energy Watchdog which said this was violation of law and also deprives consumers of their constitutional rights as matters are not being heard by the Commission since July 2025 when justice (retd) Umesh Kumar superannuated as chairperson.

Considering the urgency of the situation, the court posted the matter next week.

The petition argued by advocate Pranav Sachdeva said that the present arrangement of appointing pro-tem members is continuing as per the plan worked out by the Supreme Court in a 2023 petition filed by the then AAP government in Delhi. The AAP had later entered into a conflict with the Centre over the Lieutenant Governor’s attempts to stall appointments recommended by the Delhi government.

It referred to a 2018 judgment of the Supreme Court mandating presence of a judicial member or a person having knowledge of law to be part of such commissions that decide petitions or applications relating to tariff fixation, imposition of penalties for violating the law, among other functions.

“The status quo warrants the interference of this court since the lack of a judicial member/person of law completely disables DERC from fulfilling its adjudicatory functions. This violates the consumers’ right under Articles 14 and 21, as the petitions/applications under Section 142 of the Electricity Act (for imposing penalties) are no longer being heard or listed as per administrative notice of July 15, 2025 on DERC’s website,” the petition read.

Further, appointing pro-tem members is contrary to the Electricity Act, the petitioner argued, pointing out that such a mechanism is constitutionally impermissible for being destructive of the basic structure principles of separation of power and adjudicatory independence.