Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(xv) DGVCL,   by   its   own   inaction,   brought   about   a  situation in which the respondent was compelled  to undertake the action of removing the reverse  power relay, essentially to prevent tripping of  electrical   energy   and   consequential   damage   to  its machinery, which action has not benefitted  ESIl   or   adversely   affected   DGVCL.   ESIL   had  requested   DGVCL   to   remove   the   reverse   power  relay   in   view   of   subsequent   developments,  inter­alia,   vide   letters   dated   21.05.2011   and  08.06.2011.   Even   GETCO   had   directed   DGVCL   to  remove   the   power   flow   relay   on   04.06.2011,  which   was   not   followed   up   or   acted   upon   by  DGVCL, which is bound to act in accordance with  the directions of GETCO.