Delhi Electricity Regulatory ... vs Bses Yamuna Power Limited & Others on 15 February, 2007
4. Though the contention of the petitioners in the writ petition was that
the workers of DVB and their unions were wrongly excluded from the
tender process initiated upon unbundling of DVB but the senior counsel for
the petitioners argued primarily on the basis of the wrongs now being
committed by the unbundled entities. Reliance in this regard was placed on
the Report of the Public Accounts Committee dated 2nd March, 2006 of the
Delhi Legislative Assembly and grievance was made that though GNCTD
had on earlier occasions been specifically directed to explain the action
taken on the said Report but had in the affidavit filed not done so.
Allegations of errors in tariff determination were also raised. The senior
counsel for the unbundled entities responded by contending that the
petitioners had approached the Court belatedly after implementation of the
scheme for unbundling; that the special foras are available for challenge to
the delay; that the disinvestment in DVB has been upheld in Delhi
Electricity Regulatory Commission v. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., (2007) 3
SCC 33. It was also contended that electricity distribution is a capital
intensive business and not such which could on disinvestment have been
W.P.(C) No.3690/2002 Page 5 of 7
handed over to the workers, as is the claim of the petitioners.