Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
Sihor Steel Rerolling Mills Association vs Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors. on 4 September 2025
COURT-2
IN THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY
(Appellate Jurisdiction)
APL No. 198 OF 2016 & IA No. 1325 OF 2025
Dated: 4th September, 2025
Present : Hon`ble Mr. Sandesh Kumar Sharma, Technical Member Hon`ble Mr. Virender Bhat, Judicial Member In the matter of:
Sihor Steel Rerolling Mills Association
.... Appellant(s)
Versus
Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission & Ors.
.... Respondent(s)
Counsel on record for the Appellant(s)
: Sakie Jakharia
for App. 1
Counsel on record for the Respondent(s) : Suparna Srivastava for Res. 1
Ranjitha Ramachandran
Anand K. Ganesan
Swapna Seshadri
Ashwin Ramanathan
Harsha Manav
Srishti Khindaria
for Res. 2
Anushree Bardhan
Ranjitha Ramachandran
Anand K. Ganesan
Swapna Seshadri
Poorva Saigal
Shubham Arya
for Res. 3
Page 1 of 3
ORDER
IA No. 1325 OF 2025 (For Modification after Judgement)
It has been pointed out by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that the peak hour timings have been incorrectly typed in paragraph No. 15 of the judgement as 7 AM to 9 AM in place of 7 AM to 11 AM. Accordingly the timings in the said paragraph are hereby corrected by stating that timings for the peak hours be read as 7 AM to 11 AM instead of 7 AM to 9 AM. The corrected paragraph shall be read as under :- “15. It is evident that the Appellant had drawn attention of the Commission to the tariff order dated 31st March, 2015 where it was mentioned that the issue of change in designated peak hours shall be examined by the Commission separately. However, manifestly no such detailed examination has been done by the Commission on this issue. The Commission has simply gone by the response submitted by the 2nd Respondent. No independent empirical study has been undertaken by the Commission to ascertain whether it is necessary to continue prescribing 7 AM to 11 AM as peak hours, thereby permitting the Distribution Licensees to levy Time of Use charges for consumption of electricity during those hours. Even the response of the 2nd Respondent before the Commission was
Page 2 of 3
not based on any specific study on this aspect. The 2nd respondent had merely contended that no change in the present peak hours time zone is required as these are in place since very long and the consumers have set their consumption pattern accordingly. The mere fact that this time zone was being treated as peak hour for very long does not in itself justify its continuation for all times to come. It was incumbent upon the Commission to take note of the objections raised by the Appellant Association and to undertake a detailed study to determine whether or not to continue specifying this time zone as peak hour.”
IA is allowed and accordingly disposed of.
Virender Bhat Judicial Member
Sandesh Kumar Sharma Technical Member (Electricity) Js/mkj
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…