Sampat Singh - Active Role in Electricity Tariff Regulation in The State

Active Role in Electricity Tariff Regulation in The State

Prof Sampat Singh is among a rare class of politicians who do not hesitate in raising concerns for common man's cause. He studies the topic and issue in depth before giving any public statement on it. He seems to have a great in depth knowledge of power sector and related matters in the state of Haryana. This is the reason that he has been instrumental in raising concerns against irregularities in the state power distribution companies viz DHBVN and UHBVN. These companies were trying to pass on the deficit to the state consumers and prof Sampat Singh, despite being the ruling party MLA, opposed it openly. Similarly, he raised concerns against privatization of power distribution in Gurgaon dist. He also raised concerns over appointment of retired and old officers in Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission as members. On Feb 18th 2010, Prof Sampat Singh, who had been the single-most consistent voice against these companies, raised objections over the inclusion of the ARR of the two previous years in the revenue gaps being shown. Stating that he was not there as an MLA of a particular party, but as a consumer, he opposed the tariff hike and said fuel hike should be included in the ARR. This was allowed by the commission.

Sampat Singh urged the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) to reject the power companies’ request to levy fuel surcharge on consumers. Sampat Singh, Congress MLA from Nalwa, said the fuel surcharge adjustment (FSA) should be exposed to public scrutiny as was the practice while deciding the annual revenue requirement (ARR). This, he said, would ensure transparency and answerability in the power corporations.The consumer had the right to know whether the companies were buying the power judiciously or wasting their money. Sampat Singh said had the companies been filing true ARR, there would have been no need to revise the power tariff. The companies had purchased 2,800 million units of power at an average rate of Rs 6 per unit in 2008-09, which was why fuel surcharge had been sought. Ironically, only 40 million units at an average of Rs 5 per unit had been proposed in 2009-10. This was a glaring example of the companies’ intention to suppress the costs in the ARR, he elaborated.