Cuttack, Oct. 31: Orissa High Court will tomorrow consider the validity of a franchise agreement which the Central Electricity Supply Utility (Cesu) signed with a private company for operation in the Dhenkanal circle from November 1 on build-own-operate-and-transfer (BOOT) basis.
Prabhakar Das, 60, a resident of Dhenkanal, had challenged the agreement in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed before the court’s vacation bench and sought an interim stay.
The vacation bench of Justice Indrajit Mahanty and Justice B.N. Mohapatra, before which the PIL came up on October 27, however, refused to grant an interim stay and posted it for hearing on November 1.
Cesu chief executive Utpal Sinha had filed a caveat petition urging the court to provide an opportunity of hearing before passing an interim order. Sinha said in his petition that the franchise agreement was aimed at reducing the transmission and distribution losses of electricity vis-a-vis curbing rampant theft of electricity in the Dhenkanal circle.
Cesu has signed the agreement with Bangalore-based Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited for operations in the Dhenkanal circle, which consists of Angul, Talcher and Dhenkanal divisions.
The PIL had expressed apprehension that the franchise agreement for BOOT model operation for five years in Dhenkanal circle would double expenditure and would adversely affect the financial health of Cesu.
The court also expected the Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC), the department of energy and Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited to file responses to the PIL. It contended that there was no rationale for opting for the BOOT model operation in Dhenkanal circle as a pilot scheme formulated by the OERC had been successful after being adopted for distribution of electricity in Cesu-assigned areas.
Distribution loss in Balikuda section was reduced from 75 per cent to 18 per cent by operation of the pilot scheme with the existing work force.
“If the same method would have been implemented throughout the Cesu distribution areas, the same result could have been achieved and there was no need to adopt BOOT,” the petition contended.
